State of Organic Seed, 2016

Kristina Hubbard and Jared Zystro

June 2016

1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful to the following individuals who served on our farmer survey planning committee:

Harriet Behar, Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service Matthew Dillon, Clif Bar & Company John Foster, Earthbound Nate Lewis, Organic Trade Association Alex Lyon, University of Wisconsin-Madison James Myers, Oregon State University John Navazio, Johnny’s Selected Seeds Erica Renaud, Vitalis Organic Seeds Elia Romano, Albert Lea Seed House Margaret Scoles, Independent Organic Inspectors Association Zea Sonnabend, California Certified Organic Farmers Adam Wagner, Organically Grown Company Ira Wallace, Southern Exposure Seed Exchange

We also thank the following agencies, businesses, and organizations for distributing our farmer survey. We wouldn’t have been able to collect this data without their assistance.

Accredited Certifiers Association, Agricultural Services Certified Organic, California Certified Organic Farmers, Department of Plant and Industry/Clemson University, EcoFarm, Farm Aid, Florida Organic Growers, Georgia Organics, Global Organic Alliance, Inc., International Certification Services, Inc., Mid- west Organic Farmers Cooperative, Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service, Minnesota Crop Improvement Association, Montana Department of Agriculture, National Organic Coalition, Natu- ral Food Certifiers, New Hampshire Department of Agriculture, New Jersey Department of Agriculture, New Mexico Organic Commodity Commission, Nevada Department of Agriculture, Northeast Organic Farming Association, Northeast Organic Farming Association—New York Certified Organic, Northeast Organic Farming Association—Vermont Organic Farmers, Northern Plains Sustainable Agriculture So- ciety, Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association, Oregon Department of Agriculture, Oregon Tilth, Organic Crop Improvement Association, Organic Farmers’ Agency for Relationship Marketing, Organic Farming Research Foundation, Organic Trade Association, Organic Valley, Organically Grown Company, Pennsylvania Certified Organic, Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture, Practical Farmers of Iowa, Quality Certification Services, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Rural Advancement Foundation International, Tilth Producers of Washington, Washington Sustainable Food & Farming Network.

Thank you to the National Organic Program for promoting the farmer survey and for its enthusiasm toward this project.

We are also grateful to the following individuals for reviewing an earlier draft of this report:

Heron Breen, Fedco Seeds Matthew Dillon, Clif Bar & Company Mac Ehrhardt, Albert Lea Seed House Erica Renaud, Vitalis Organic Seeds Adrienne Shelton, Seed Matters Fellow Tom Stearns, High Mowing Organic Seeds Bill Tracy, University of Wisconsin-Madison Abby Youngblood, National Organic Coalition 2 We’d like to thank everyone who participated in one of our eight listening sessions held at the conferences listed below. Thanks to the following individuals for their assistance in planning and facilitating some of these sessions: Michael Mazourek and Michael Glos, Cornell University; Ginny Moore, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Laura Lewis, Washington State University; Suzanne Stone, University of Georgia; and Ken Greene, Hudson Valley Seed Library.

Carolina Farm Stewardship Association (2014) EcoFarm (2015) Georgia Organics Conference & Expo (2015) National Young Farmers Coalition (2014) Northeast Organic Farming Association – New York Conference (2015) Organicology (2015) San Juan Islands Agricultural Summit (2015) Tilth Producers of Washington (2014)

Thank you to Marie-Eve Levert, strategy & research manager for the Canada Organic Trade Associa- tion. Marie-Eve provided guidance on our organic certifier survey based on her experience researching and writing the first market study of organic seed in Canada, The Market for Organic and Ecological Seed in Canada: Trends and Opportunities, 2014. She allowed us to repeat some of the questions used in their certifier survey. Thanks also to Jackie Sleeper of Oregon Tilth and Zea Sonnabend of California Certified Organic Farmers for their input on this survey.

Thanks to OSA interns Caitlin Moore, Ellie Costello, and Kelli Slater for helping with various surveys and providing valuable research assistance.

We want to acknowledge the tremendous support of OSA staff members: Brook Brouwer, Micaela Col- ley, Katy Davis, Tony Kleese, Cathleen McCluskey, Laurie McKenzie, Steve Peters, and Jennifer Turney.

Finally, this project wouldn’t be possible without the generous financial support of the Clif Bar Family Foundation’s Seed Matters initiative, the UNFI Foundation, and New Belgium Brewing Company. This project received no seed industry funding.

Please contact Kristina Hubbard at [email protected] with any questions or for more information about the report. Electronic copies can be downloaded at www.stateoforganicseed.org. Physical copies are available by donation.

3 Table of Contents

Executive Summary 5

Introduction 9 History, vision, and principles of organic seed systems 9 State of Organic Seed methods: Hearing from stakeholders 13

Chapter 1: State of Organic Plant Breeding 15 Organic plant breeding in the private sector 16 Organic plant breeding in the public sector 17 Participatory plant breeding 24 Organic variety trials 26 Summary 28 Recommendations 28

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 30 Who took our organic seed survey? 31 How much organic seed is being used? 31 Challenges in sourcing organic seed 32 Reasons organic farmers are sourcing more organic seed 34 What progress have we made? 36 Summary 44 Recommendations 44

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 46 Inconsistent enforcement of the organic seed regulatory requirement 47 Contamination by GE crops 54 Increased consolidation in the seed industry 61 The privatization of seed and impacts on organic seed innovation 62 Insufficient investments in public plant breeding 65 Summary 65 Recommendations 66

Conclusion and Recommendations 69

References 73

Appendix A 74 A.1: Organic seed research investment methods 74 A.2: Organic seed research projects 75 A.3: Survey questions for principal investigators of research projects 78

Appendix B 79 B.1 Seed company survey questions 79

Appendix C 82 4 C.1 Certifier survey questions 82

Appendix D 86 D.1 Farmer survey methods 86 D.2 Farmer survey data 88 Executive Summary

rganic Seed Alliance’s (OSA) State of Organic Seed, 2016 is part of an ongoing project to monitor the status Oof organic seed systems in the US. Our 2011 fndings provided the frst comprehensive needs assessment for developing these systems. We’re committed to measuring progress every fve years, and this report serves as our frst update.

The USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP) requires the use of organic seed when commercially available. How- ever, the organic seed sector was almost nonexistent when the program began and is still working to meet demand. Meanwhile, the organic food industry continues to grow, with sales toppling $39 billion in 2015. This makes our work to develop organic seed systems that respond to the needs of organic farmers and the diverse markets they serve that much more urgent.

We’re making progress according to our newest fndings. We arrived at this conclusion through a number of surveys and other forms of data collection, including a full analysis of research investments over the last fve years. We surveyed organic farmers, organic seed companies, and organic certifers to better understand barriers to expanding organic seed systems from a seed sourcing, seed production, and regulation enforcement standpoint, respectively. And we gathered input from additional stakeholders at eight organic farming conferences across the US in 2014 and 2015.

The purpose of our State of Organic Seed project is to measure the progress we’re making in increasing the availability, quality, and integrity of organic seed. We envision an organic food system built on a foundation of organic seed. This report serves as an important summary of ongoing challenges to achieving this goal, and includes updated recommendations to guide research, education, and policy efforts for the next fve years.

Why organic seed?

As a fundamental input in agriculture, seed serves as a farmer’s frst defense against pest, disease, and other production challenges. Seed genetics also largely dictate the quality and integrity of our food – from appearance to favor to nutritional content. In this way, seed holds endless potential for transforming the food we eat and how we farm, especially when coupled with the principles that helped build the organic movement – the principles of health, ecology, fairness, and care.

But seed is much more than an input. It’s a living, natural resource that demands careful management to ensure a secure and healthy food supply. Currently, the dominant seed system is controlled by a handful of chemical and biotechnology companies with no genuine interest in the success of organic agriculture. These players abuse intellectual property rights and fercely protect them. They discourage farmers from participating in research and seed saving. And they put shareholder interests above those of the greater public.

As demand for organic products grows, so does demand for organic seed. As this report shows, the organic seed State of Organic Seed, 2016 supply isn’t keeping up with broader organic industry growth. Most organic farmers responding to our survey still rely on conventional (non-organic) seed for at least part of their operations.

Importantly, we found that farmers want to source organic seed to support investments in organic plant breeding.

It’s broadly accepted that organic systems provide different growing environments from conventional systems and 5 that breeding crops under organic conditions can deliver varieties that increase the success of organic farmers and strengthen the organic integrity of their products. This is one of many benefts to expanding organic seed systems. - - - - This fnding demonstrates an im

Farmers responding to our survey

The vast majority ofThe majority vast to our farmers responding Unfortunately, the Unfortunately, biggest producers still use relatively little

In our last report we documented a mere $9 million in investments be investments in million $9 mere a reportdocumented last our In we

enforcement of the organic seed requirement in general. Fewer organic certifersFewer are requesting that farmers increase their use of organic seed, and there is inconsistent

Some key findings progressmade the industryincreasing seed in and organic the years have community fve last the over that clear It’s and integrity of quality, organic seed. This progressavailability, includes: Organic farmers report using more organic seed dominant system controlled by chemical and biotechnology companies. By establishing a shared vision and roadmap and vision shared a establishing By companies. biotechnology and chemical by controlled system dominant conventional the in seen trends negative the avoid organiccan the community organic systems, seed developing for agricultureseed sector and conventional high-quality more organicbroadly while delivering crop seed for all scales, this vision. Thisachieve making to report and regions. helps monitor the progresstypes, we’re ger challenges in agriculture, including the preservation of crop genetic diversity and agricultural biodiversity; the ofprivatization seed and market consolidation; agricultural production fueled by high-input chemical systems that food the in defciencies nutritional grown; crops and seed the in vulnerability genetic nature; and humans to toxic are they feed. the communities and farmers, plant breeders, and economic injustices faced by supply; and social the from distinct very is that organicseed for path a create opportunityto an has organiccommunity the Therefore, We believe the believe benefts ofWe organic seed systems go helping beyond well organic farmers meet a regulatory require big address help can – system seed dominant the to alternative an as organicviewed An when ment. – system seed in some areas. Some ofin some areas. the challenges include: • by $22 million in the last fve years alone years fve last the in million $22 by 1996 and tween 2010. This progress is However, encouraging, especially since in it funders. includes more diversity other sectors. still pale in comparison to funding directed toward organic seed investments seen major improvements haven’t Despite this challengesprogress, remain for expanding We organic seed systems. A signifcant percentage of farmers seed forsave either on-farm indicating use or to sell commercially, important opportunities to fll organic seed supply gaps survey are interested in learning how to produce seed commercially. The lack of training, economic opportunity, and seed processing facilities were the top factors keeping farmers from growing organic seed commercially. Public and in investments private organic plant breeding and other organic seed research increasedhave More farmers believe organic seed is important to the integrity of for organic production organic are important to the success offood and organic agriculture that varieties bred understanding among proved farmers that breeding crops in organic systems is important to their success and that of organic the broader industry. and this has a big impact on overall acres planted to organic acres seed. and this has a big impact on overall Organic farmers are more satisfed with the organic seed they’re using report fewer problems with organic seed compared to fve years ago germination,(e.g., and variety integrity, seed- borne crop types. consistent across diseases). This fnding was

Executive Summary 6 • Organic certifers and inspectors lack training, resources, and strong guidance on organic seed availability, including a national organic seed database that includes full participation from the seed industry. • Larger organic operations are still less likely to use organic seed. • Buyer requirements remain a barrier to using organic seed for some of these larger operations. • Forage crop growers haven’t improved their use of organic seed. • There remains a lack of experienced organic seed producers. • Organic seed is more expensive to produce. • Organic seed research, education, and policy work is underfunded. • Some public and private breeders have limited access to appropriate germplasm for organic plant breeding projects. • At times, intellectual property rights serve as a barrier for farmers, breeders, and seed companies. • Public and private organic breeding programs need more infrastructure and capacity. • The public is generally uneducated on the benefts of organic seed. • There are inadequate policies and practices to protect organic seed from contamination by genetically engineered crops.

Recommendations

Building organic seed systems that are responsive to farmer and market needs will take collaborative and coordinated strategies in research, education, and policy. Below are the top fve priorities from each of the chapters covering organic plant breeding, the organic seed supply, and organic seed policy. A full list of recommendations is included in the conclusion to serve as a roadmap for the next fve years.

» Organic plant breeding

Increase public and private investments in organic plant breeding and other organic seed research While investments in organic breeding are on the rise, including investments from diverse funding sources, they’re still insuffcient to support more rapid increases in the diversity and quantity of organic seed available. Beyond breeding, there must also be more investment in research that supports organic seed production, management of seed-borne diseases, and other priorities identifed by seed companies, researchers, and farmers producing organic seed.

Study and implement successful models, methods, and approaches to organic plant breeding Organic plant breeding requires different approaches because the production systems are different from their conventional counterparts, as are the values, principles, and regulations associated with organic agriculture.

Develop new, and expand existing, organic variety trial networks at the regional and national level Variety trials provide essential performance data to farmers and researchers but currently lack coordination in management, funding, and the dissemination of results.

Develop and promote fair intellectual property models These models shouldn’t impinge on breeders’ and farm- State of Organic Seed, 2016 ers’ rights while also allowing for returns on research investments to support future innovation.

Improve commercialization pipelines Mechanisms are needed to help new organic varieties get into the hands of farmers, including better networking between breeders and seed companies, coordination of testing networks, and streamlined intellectual property and royalty negotiations. 7

- - - The NOP should At times, utility patents utility times, At

Explore and encourage the use the encourage and Explore

Organic seed producers need yield and

There’s an urgent need to provide more more provide to need urgent an There’s

Many organic seed stakeholders want to see an see to want stakeholders seed organic Many

The US Department of Agriculture and other

Consistent ofenforcement the organic seed require Organic seed policy organizing capacity is lacking in part

Organic seed policy Organic seed supply Organic

Address problems of market concentration and restrictive intellectual property rights property intellectual restrictive and ofproblemsconcentration Address market sourcing of organic seed. Improve regulations governing genetically engineered crops government agencies must improve regulations and oversight to alleviate the current burdens and costs currently associated with GE contamination in organic seed. more consistent enforcement of the organic seed requirement, including holding accountable the operations that in their organic seed sourcing. improvement demonstrate continuous don’t Increase certifer and inspector trainings in organic seed opera organic and inspectors, certifers, to available resources more NOP; the from guidance more require will ment increased support can inspectors and certifersorganic how on trainings regular and availability; seed organic on tors into its development, and why it may have a higher price tag. price tag. a higher have it may and why into its development, » Amend the National Organic Program’s guidance document regarding organic amend its seed March 2013 guidance document to provide more clarity and instruction that will ensure stronger and of organic crop insurance and other incentive programs to encourage farmers to integrate seed production into their into production seed integrate to farmersencourage to programs incentive other and of insurance crop organic organic farm plans. seed organic promote to campaign education public a Develop educational campaign directed at farmers, gardeners, and consumers about the benefts of organic seed, what goes Create fornetworks organic seed producers and suppliers to support information and equipment sharing Organic seed producers are challenged by a lack of access to appropriate seed harvesting and cleaning equipment, and need more support storage. with handling and production seed organic to inherent risks economic the fromgrowers Protect formal training and resources to ofincrease the number organic seed producers ofin a variety crops and at dif ferent scales. Develop region-specifc resources for production data and practices and region to support crop type economic data by success. their because foundations and others in the philanthropic community don’t fund the policy priorities described in this offoundation a goalofon the built to system point organicseed. organic food risk an a establishing is this report– and other forms of intellectual property rights are abused at the expense of farmers’, breeders’, and seed companies’ seed ofand expense breeders’, the farmers’, at abused are offormsrights propertyother intellectual and freedom to operate. Direct more funding toward organic seed advocacy » Train more organic seed producers and support existing producers

Introduction 8 Introduction

n 2011, Organic Seed Alliance (OSA) published State History, vision, and principles of Iof Organic Seed. This was the frst comprehensive as- organic seed systems sessment of organic seed systems in the US. Following the publication of this benchmark study, OSA commit- As a fundamental input in agriculture, seed serves as ted to updating this analysis with new data and recom- a farmer’s frst defense against pest, disease, and other mendations every fve years as a way to monitor the production challenges. Seed genetics also largely dictate status of organic seed. We’re proud to release this frst the quality and integrity of our food – from appearance fve-year update. to favor to nutritional content. But seed is much more than an input. It’s a living, natural resource that de- The purpose of OSA’s State of Organic Seed project is mands careful management. Conserving and expand- to measure the progress we’re making in increasing the ing seed diversity is paramount to ensuring a secure and availability, quality, and integrity of organic seed. We healthy food supply. envision an organic food system built on a foundation of organic seed. This report serves as an important Seed labeled as “organic” has a relatively short history. summary of ongoing needs to achieve this goal and up- Organic seed must be grown under all of the require- dated recommendations to guide future research, edu- ments for organic food production. For example, or- cation, and policy efforts. As such, six objectives guide ganic seed crops are grown without substances prohib- this project (see below). ited for organic production, such as synthetic pesticides and fertilizers. The US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Organic Program (NOP) requires that State of Organic Seed organic operations be certifed by an accredited certify- project objectives ing agent (ACA) and managed according to an organic system plan that is approved by this certifer. (1) Improve organic seed stakeholders’ understanding of the barriers and opportunities in When the NOP was launched in 2002, only a hand- building organic seed systems (stakeholders in- ful of companies sold certifed organic seed. While the clude organic farmers, certifiers, seed industry, regulations require the use of certifed organic seed to food industry, policy advocates, researchers, ensure organic integrity along the entire production and others); (2) build regional seed networks chain, there remains an allowance for untreated, con- that support a national supply chain of or- ventional (non-organic) seed when an equivalent organic seed; (3) help organic farmers meet the ganic variety is commercially unavailable. This exemp- National Organic Program (NOP) requirement tion is necessary until the supply of organic seed can to use certified organic seed; (4) support regu- fully meet demand. latory approaches that protect organic seed from contamination by excluded methods (e.g., And demand is growing. Sales of organic products to- GMOs) and prohibited substances without unin- taled more than $43 billion in 2015, an 11% increase tentionally damaging the nascent organic seed industry; (5) improve how seed is managed, compared to 2014. Food purchases represent $39.7 1 both privately and publicly, to reduce concen- billion of this total. Yet the organic seed supply isn’t State of Organic Seed, 2016 tration of ownership and stimulate competition keeping up with this growth. As this report shows, and innovation, including addressing problem- most organic farmers still rely on conventionally pro- atic intellectual property rights associated with duced seed for at least part of their operation. seed; and (6) identify urgent organic seed research needs and increase investments to fund There has been considerable progress in increasing the 9 these and other priorities to improve organic availability of organic seed. Critical investments in or- seed availability, quality, and integrity. ganic seed research are increasing. Dozens of companies now supply organic seed in the commercial mar- - - - for all scales, crop types, and regions. Seed is and for crop too regions. all types, im scales, portanttobelocked under patent rights andmanaged in the hands of a few corporations. The dominant seed system is driven by the proft mo oftives chemical and biotechnologyThese companies. aggressively propertyintellectual players leverage rights to the point of abuse. They discourage farmers from participating in research and seed saving. And too of ten they put shareholder interests before those of the greater public. create to opportunity an has community organic The a much different path for organic isseed. to Our create vision organic seed systems very the dominant system. By distinctestablishing a shared vision from we systems, seed organic developing for roadmap and canavoidthenegative trends seentheinconventional seed sector while delivering high-quality organic seed - - - - in the seed and crops grown; nutritional defciencies theinfood supply; andsocial andeconomic injustices faced by farmers, plant breeders, food system work and they thefeed. communities ers, in agriculture include the preservationof the agriculture include in genet crop ic diversity and agricultural biodiversity; privatization of seed and market consolidation; agricultural pro duction fueled by high-input, chemical systems that are toxic to humans and nature; genetic vulnerability meet a regulatory requirement. Organic seed found the systems to adhere and needs farmers’ to respond that ing principles of are paramount the organic movement health ofto the success and agriculture. broadly more to address trying we’re The challenges ketplace. ketplace. And our own data shows that organicusing more seed. farmers are Make no mistake: The benefts of expanding organic seed systems go well beyond helping organic farmers

Introduction 10 What do we mean exactly by an “organic seed sys- genetics contained within a seed can determine if tem?” OSA envisions a seed system that takes a de- chemical controls will be necessary for dealing with centralized approach to breeding, production, and production challenges (we can adapt seed to naturally distribution, and where seed is managed as a public re- resist disease). Genetics can also determine the secu- source while allowing for healthy growth in the private rity of our food supply (we can adapt seed to warmer sector. To foster such a system, actions must focus and dryer conditions), how input-dependent crops are on increasing the diversity of genetic and fnancial re- (we can breed for increased nutrient and water use sources, and expanding partners involved in breeding, seed production, and policy advocacy. Both competition and coordination are healthy factors in organic Principles guiding the State of seed systems, but the benefts must be shared and the Organic Seed project outcomes must support a thriving, environmentally sound agricultural system. 1. Seed, as a limited natural resource, must be managed in a way that enhances its To do this, we must frst understand the principles that long-term viability and integrity. guide this work and the benefts of establishing viable 2. The maintenance and improvement of ge- and resilient organic seed systems. The principles pub- netic and biological diversity are essential lished in our frst State of Organic Seed report continue for the success of sustainable food sys- to guide this project (see sidebar). In many ways they tems and greater global food supply. can be boiled down to the principles of health, ecology, fairness, and care – the same principles that built the 3. The equitable exchange of plant genetics organic movement. enhances innovation and curtails the negative impacts of concentrated ownership and The benefts of establishing organic seed systems are consolidated power in decision making. many. First, plants bred under organic conditions have 4. Sharing information enhances research and the potential to be better adapted to these production leads to better adaptation of best practices. systems. Organic farming challenges can be quite different from conventional systems, where synthetic chemi- 5. Agricultural research should serve more than one goal and strive to increase ben- cals and nutrient sources are commonly used to control efits for all living systems, including soil, pests, diseases, and plant nutrition. Seed provides the plants, animals, and humans. genetic tools to confront these day-to-day challenges in the feld, and breeding plants in the environment of 6. Public institutions and public employees their intended use benefts this process. should serve public needs.

7. Farmers have inherent rights as agricultural Furthermore, adaptation is key to achieving resilience stewards, including the ability to save, own, in our food and agricultural system. Adapting seed and sell seed, and are key leaders in de- to changing climates, resource availability, and envi- veloping best practices, applicable research, ronmental conditions is one way to mitigate risks for and agricultural regulations and policy that State of Organic Seed, 2016 farmers and the food supply they serve. This resilien- affect them and the future of seed. cy is longer lasting when more organic farmers have the skills to further adapt and improve plant genetics 8. Application of the precautionary principle – the social responsibility to protect food through seed saving and on-farm breeding. systems from harm when scientific investi- 11 gation has found potential risk – is neces- Seed therefore represents profound potential for im- sary to create food security for the future. proving our food and agricultural systems. The plant ------

Each year, 400-500 2

100% of seed planted for cabbage seed pro duction is treated with a fungicide 50% of acreage receives a fungicide applica tion in late winter-spring 100% of acreage receives multiple fungicide applications from full bloom to pre-harvest of toxins, including synthetic pesticides, in or ganic production is one of the many benefits to expanding organic seed acreage. Herbicides: 100% of acreage receives a pre-plant herbi cide application 50% of acreage receives a herbicide applica tion in late fall or spring applica herbicide an receives acreage of 35% tion in late spring pre-bloom Insecticides: insecticide an with treated is acreage of 100% at transplanting 100% of acreage is treated with insecticide after transplanting a second at insecticide with sprayed is acreage of 100% bloom (timed to avoid bee activity) Fungicides: Pesticides used in cabbage seed production Below is a list of typical tions – pesticide including herbicides, applica insecticides, and fungicides – for conventional cabbage production in seed Washington, a state that repre pro seed cabbage of 75% approximately sents duction in the US and 25% of cabbage seed production in the world. acres of cabbage seed is grown in the state. Recommendations for pesticide may applications vary, and in some cases will be higher than those listed below when multiple pesti absence The combination. in applied are cides - - - - - based on

Re-establishing

critical to resiliency and to to and resiliency to critical of our food (we can breed

Seed is Seed quality

improved improved nutritional content).

becoming more seed self-suffcient and reducing input ventional seed production. ventional Third, expanding organic seed systems can economic increase opportunities for farmers who successfully integrate seed production into their operations. The economic benefts include selling seed commercially, duced for seed. There are also chemicals used in seed production to enhance pollination and ensure that the seed doesn’t shatter prior to harvest. Therefore, when farmers choose organic seed they’re choosing to not contribute to this upstream pollution caused by con before they go to seed. Crops grown for seed remain in the ground longer to complete their reproductive Thiscycle. extended growth means there are more op crops. seed damage to diseases and pests for portunities ofapplications higher allow often regulations Pesticide chemicals on non-edible crops, including crops pro intensive intensive systems (see sidebar). Not many farmers, let alone consumers, think about their “seed footprint” – that there are negative byproducts to consider even before a seed is planted. Crops grown for direct con sumption, such as vegetables, are typically harvested the atmosphere. Most American agriculture relies in tensively on synthetic chemicals, crude from produced entirely including almost are that pesticides modern petroleum or natural gas products. Conventional seed is typically produced in chemical- Agriculture brings the interconnectedness of natural systems and human activity into sharp relief. The way we farm has a huge impact on our environment and human health. Agriculture burns signifcant amounts of fossil fuel and emits other greenhouse gases into this whole-systems approach. A “systems breeding” approach can provide the agricultural, environmental, social, and economic qualities that refect the values of organic agriculture. Organic seed systems also beneft our environment. for a more resilient food system in the face ofchange climate requires a whole-systems approach solutions. proactive effciency), and the

Introduction 12 Seed is too important to be locked under patent rights and managed in the hands of a few corporations costs, and limiting fnancial risks by having seed that is needed useful data from these stakeholders. We con- better adapted to individual farms. ducted formal surveys with several of these stakeholder groups and held eight listening sessions to gather ad- And, fourth, the expansion of organic seed systems has ditional input from community members not targeted been coupled by a growing diversity of stakeholders in- by surveys. Our methods for data collection are further volved in their development. For example, more chefs, described in the appendices. retailers, and food companies are involved in variety tastings and evaluations, identifying market gaps, and Farmer survey even in organic breeding projects. This diversity of decision makers fosters a more participatory and decen- In 2014, we conducted a national survey of certifed or- tralized approach to seed innovation. This approach fa- ganic crop growers to assess their attitudes and percep- cilitates market adoption of new varieties with aesthetic tions regarding organic seed, their current use of or- and culinary qualities demanded by organic consumers ganic seed, and any obstacles that restrict organic seed while also addressing the agronomic challenges related sourcing. The survey also asked which crops and traits to organic production. should be prioritized through organic plant breeding programs. Many additional topics were covered in this State of Organic Seed methods: survey. We conducted a survey in 2009 that asked many Hearing from stakeholders of the same questions, allowing us (for the frst time) to measure our progress over the last fve years. An organic seed system, like all seed systems, involves the essential practices of breeding, production, and Certifier survey distribution to deliver the end product. The quantity and quality of organic seed delivered to farmers is the Most major accredited certifying agencies (ACAs) re- result of various stakeholders and their actions within sponded to our organic certifer survey. Collectively these this system. Stakeholders include plant breeders and 22 ACAs represent 68% of certifed operations in the US. other agricultural researchers, organic certifers, seed This survey, distributed in 2015, helped us understand companies, policy advocates, organic food processors, how the organic seed requirement is being enforced, challenges ACAs face in enforcement, and their ideas for how retail businesses, and the farms planting organic seed, to name just some. Actions include research, educa- to make enforcement more consistent. tion, policy, and advocacy efforts. No single stake- Seed company survey holder group can address the diverse seed needs of organic farmers alone. When actions are guided by In 2015, we conducted a survey of seed companies that shared values, the progress is faster, more coordinat- produce and supply organic seed. The purpose was to ed, and longer lasting. better assess the challenges and opportunities in grow- State of Organic Seed, 2016 ing the organic seed industry. We heard from 16 com- Organic seed systems are therefore the product of panies that range in size and scale. multi-stakeholder efforts. Any system – any movement – is only as strong as the sum of its parts. To that end, Researcher survey methods for developing our report fndings and rec- 13 ommendations required diverse stakeholder input. To Our analysis of organic seed research investments al- understand the challenges and solutions before us, we lowed us to identify the primary sources of funding ------cussions and initiatives that support the growth and success of organic seed systems. These updates cover Na the and ProgramofOrganic National work the the tional Organic Standards Board as their efforts relate to consistent enforcement of the organic seed require excluded and purity ofseed issues organic the and ment discussion a include GMOs on updates Policy methods. on the regulation of also We biotechnology. provide a to and use of organic seed, as well as remaining barriers remaining as ofwell use as and seed, organicto to increasing the amount of organic seed being used. helped survey company seed organic our from Findings us outline major challenges in increasing our organic including seed production ensuring capacity, growth in community Theorganicseed industry. organicseed the has made progress in training more organic seed pro ducers here in the US, but increasing the number of skilled organic seed producers remains a major need. of a number Chapter 3 provides updates on policy dis for funding public increase to advocacy on update short development cultivar public and breeding plant classical for the organic and beyond. community history of this feld and updates on organicother seed and organic breeding in plant ments research invest research. also We provide examples of progress we’ve made since our 2011 report in expanding funding and we discuss major challenges partnerships. to Lastly, ex panding organic plant breeding as a feld and industry. restric role the at look in-depth an take we particular In or inhibiting in play can rights property intellectual tive ganicseed innovation. ofsupply state seed organicthe the discusses 2 Chapter – our community’s capacity to commercially produce organic seed varieties in ample diversity, quality, farmernational and our from results at looking By quantity. farmers’access in progress identify to able we’re survey, ------we’re making in increasing the availability, quality, and integrity of organic seed The purpose of OSA’s State of Seed Organic project is to measure the progress Chapter 1 covers the burgeoning scientifc feld of or ganic plant breeding, where increased research invest ments are leading to more innovation in sector and the on our public nation’s farms. We provide a short covers the distinct components ofcovers an organic seed sys tem. We conclude the report with a summary of rec ommendations to serve as a roadmap for the organic years. the next fve over community senting different geographies, including individuals not organic as such above, described surveys the by targeted and policy advocates. food companies, seed producers, This report is organized by three chapters that each Listening sessions Listening we held eight listening sessions at Lastly, organic farm ing conferences in 2014 and 2015. These listening ses sions were important for gathering through additional guided input discussions with stakeholders repre research project that ft the categories ofcategories plant the organic ft that project research breeding and other organic seed research. We asked open-ended questions that helped us better stand under the successes, challenges, and opportunities for organic seed research. and what these resources contributed to in the way of conducted the same We and regions. crops, topics, analysis fve years ago, so our fndings in this report represent our frst update to those data. also We dis of investigators principal the to surveyeach a tributed

Introduction 14 Chapter1

State of Organic Plant Breeding

rganic plant breeding is now an established feld Oin the public and private sectors. It’s broadly accepted that organic systems provide different growing environments from conventional systems and that breeding crops under organic conditions can deliver varieties that increase the success of organic farmers and strengthen the organic integrity of their products. And yet most organic farmers still rely on plant varieties bred in and targeted for conventional systems.

Conventional production systems often rely on synthetic fertilizers and on toxic chemicals to combat pests and diseases. At its best, farming organically isn’t just a matter of replacing these chemical inputs with others allowed by the organic standards. Organic agriculture embraces long-term and preventative strategies, such as building soil health and enhancing biodiversity, to address pest, disease, fertility, and other production needs. This low-input and systems-based approach also means organic farmers are more dependent than their conventional counterparts on plant varieties that have strong resistance to pests and diseases and are adapted to specifc environmental conditions and farming prac- State of Organic Seed, 2016 tices. Yet conventional agriculture is receiving the bulk of research investments.

The origins of organic plant breeding in the US aren’t well documented. In the 1970s, the private seed sector 15 began to grow rapidly, in part because the Plant Vari- ety Protection Act (PVPA) provided plant developers ------Seed companies of all sizes with an interest in organic plant breeding face a number of challenges to increas ing investments in this area. These challenges are in terrelated with other parts of an organic seed system, companies example, re For from production to policy. the private sector As mentioned, over the last 20 years the seed indus try in general has become much more – concentrated meaning plant-breeding decisions for jor crops are many being made by a ma handful of companies. Mergers and acquisitions are justifed for the purpose of effciencies of scale. As a result, large geographi cal areas are abandoned and farmers in these areas are left to use old varieties or newer ones developed for come still but ideal than less be may that regions other closest to ftting their needs. Furthermore, the most biotechnologyand chemical are players seed dominant companies with no genuine interest in the success of organic agriculture and therefore hold no interest in the continued supply of existing varieties that might serve organic farmers’ needs. For new these varieties must frst excel companies, in major production ar eas or across a wide range of environments. Organic va for producers looking working left in are more diffcult meanwhile, or less common conditions, growing needs. their meet to happen just that rieties ate on a relatively small scale, some ofsome scale, small companies relatively these a on ate are contributing to the organic seed supply by breed ing new varieties and improving older varieties, often in partnership with farmers. Some of these companies that concentration market to response in launched were disappear farmers in importantvarieties resulted seeing from their seed catalogs. rel infancy, its in still is organicbreeding plant Because atively few varieties available today have actually been developed in organic systems. Both private and public invest programsincreasing breeding to challenges face ments in organic breeding. Below we explore progress made as well as challenges and needs moving forward for both sectors. Organic plant breeding in ------

* New players have entered the organic seed ** about our national infrastructure breeding? for A few seed companies have budgets organic for or plant ganic plant breeding, but most don’t and instead rely on larger organic companies and university breeding programs to provide varieties appropriate for organic systems. Organic seed purchasing is up, but what do we know ** A few larger companies primarily focused on breeding have diversified into organics, including Enza Zaden/Vitalis Organic Seeds and Bejo Seeds. Medium-scale retail companies are companies retail Medium-scale Seeds. Bejo and Seeds Organic Zaden/Vitalis Enza including organics, into diversified have breeding on focused primarily companies larger few A ** also actively building organic plant breeding programs with significant investments, such as High Mowing Organic Seeds and Johnny’s Selected Seeds. Smaller companies are actively Seeds, Prairie Road Organic Seeds, and Wild Garden Seeds. breeding for organic agriculture as well, and though we can’t name them all, some include Adaptive Seeds, Fruition * This initial survey was the tip of the iceberg in understanding the needs of organic seed companies. For our 2021 report, we will be conducting a deeper survey that goes into specific into goes that survey deeper a conducting be will we report, 2021 our For companies. seed organic of needs the understanding in iceberg the of tip the was survey initial This * data on seed industry growth. crops, acreage, and economics, and the diversity and scale of organic seed companies, to collect more detailed that most of the companies responding experienced a gross increase revenue of 6 – 20+% this over time pe riod from certifed organic seed. public breeding communities have responded to the de the to responded have communities breeding public the supply is growing know mand for organic seed. We ofbecause since companies organicseed in increase an the NOP launched and an increase in their sales. We conducted a survey of organic seed companies to bet ter understand changes over the last fve years, fnding ganic principles and provided more options for organicfor options more provided and ganicprinciples farmers and other growers underserved by the domi nant seed companies. Since the NOP was established, both the private and seed requirement established by the 2002 National Or ganic Program (NOP), urgencyprovided for this need. Furthermore, growth in the organic seed sector ofof ush concept awareness the breeding growing a in ered for organic systems. The organic community began to or met that way a in breeding plant advancing on focus mercial seed sector. mercial seed sector. In the 2000s, organic plant breeding and seed produc tion gained more attention. The lack of seed priate for organic agriculture, appro coupled with the organic tions (NGOs) and a handful of seed businesses with an interest in supporting organic agriculture were also established. These players commonly lacked breeding selling conservingand on focused largely and programs counter to varieties plant heirloom and open-pollinated com the in emerging was that of loss diversity the crop temporary yet control exclusive over the marketing of organizanon-governmental time, this At varieties. new industry in the last ten years. These companies are genTheseare companies years. industryten last the in erally regionally focused with an emphasis on conserv Though they oper ing and expanding genetic diversity.

Chapter 1: State of Organic Plant Breeding 16 sponding to our survey say that organic certifers are decision makers in both the public and private sectors. too lenient in allowing conventional seed to be planted by organic growers. In one company’s words, there is As you’ll read below, we have good data on organic an “ongoing lack of regulatory enforcement and gap- plant breeding funding directed toward the public sector. ing holes in regulatory interpretation” of the organic However, we lack that kind of data for the private sector. seed requirement. If farmers don’t buy organic seed, It will be helpful in future analyses if we can estimate the companies will lack the money and incentive to invest level of private investment in organic breeding. in organic plant breeding. Organic plant breeding in Another company said the burden and costs of test- the public sector ing breeding lines for GMOs, and having access to non-GMO lines, is a challenge to developing a robust Public and NGO plant breeding programs are criti- organic seed supply. Finally, capital and infrastructure cal to developing healthy organic seed systems. Ideally, constraints were mentioned by a number of compa- public breeders shouldn’t overly rely on the direct eco- nies. All of these challenges are described in more de- nomic benefts resulting from their programs and in- tail in Chapter 2. stead operate with more independence.* This independence allows public programs to focus on developing The seed industry alone cannot address all of the seed varieties that meet the regional needs of the organic needs of organic farmers. Diversity at multiple levels farming community and not on varieties that are widely leads to a more sustainable agriculture: genetic diver- adapted (coast-to-coast) or that meet the criteria of in- sity, crop diversity, farm diversity, funding diversity, vestors. This independence also fosters another impor- and intellectual diversity, to name a few. A diversity tant function of university breeding programs: to train of stakeholders and decision makers, especially at the the next generation of plant breeders. plant-breeding level, is essential, because plant-breeding decisions help determine the future of our food supply. In the public sector, federal grants that support organic These decisions should be the responsibility of many Figure 1. Funding for public organic plant breedingresearch and have other helped organic to formalize seed organic plant breed- initiatives by source (1996 - 2018) Figure 1. Funding for public organic plant breeding and other organic seed initiatives by source (1996 - 2018)

OREI $23,739,767

SARE $2,565,410

Other Federal Funds** $1,909,248

Clif Bar Family Foundation $1,382,420

Other Non-Federal Funds*** $1,688,961 State of Organic Seed, 2016

** Including RMA, RBEG, SCBG, Hatch, and others *** Including FAFO, CERES Trust, OFRF and others

* It’s important to note that if public plant breeders or their programs do not receive compensation from variety releases it becomes even more important that public funding is used to encourage them to work on breeding projects that are a priority for organic agriculture. Breeders are at least in part driven by economics. There is an important balance between the economic incentive to seek grants, private investments in plant breeding, and economic benefits from variety releases. If a breeder is overly driven by economic returns then there is less incentive to breed for lower value crops or varieties. - - - - -

2018

2017

2016 2015

*Values after 2014 *Values after are currently commited funds. Ultimately, funds would be expected to be greater.

2014 Other areas include seed *

2013

2012

2011 2010

Since our 2011 analysis, a major new funder funder new major a analysis, 2011 our Since

2009

2008

2007

According to our analysis, federal and state agencies and private foundations have contributed more than organicother and breeding organicplant to million $31 seed initiatives since 1996 (see Figure 2). The vast ma plant organic supported has (88%) offunding jority this breeding and variety trials. production research and education, enterprisedevelop education, and research production 3). and policy (see Figure ment, systems development, Of million, rapidly. $31 increased the have Investments more than $22 million has been contributed in the last fve years alone. The largest three sources of funding were USDA-OREI, SARE, and other federal funding programs. * Some of these organic plant breeding and variety trial projects also included aspects of seed production research and education, but those aspects were considered major parts of the projects. too small to be ** Other federal funding sources include USDA’s Risk Management Agency, Rural Busi ness Development Grants, Specialty Crop Block Grants, Hatch funds, and other sources. those labeled as “multi-regional,” followed by those in Northwest, andtheMidwest, NortheastPacifc (see Fig ure 4). In our 2011 analysis, multi-regional projects re of organic seed research has joined the list. The ClifBar Family Foundation is currently the fourth largest supporter of organic plant breeding and other organic representing seed more initiatives, than $1.3 million of these investments. By region, projects receiving the most support include 2006

- - - 2005

- - -

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997 1996 $0 Figure 2. Funding for public organic plant public organic 2. Funding for Figure other organic and breeding year by seed initiatives $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,500,000 oats, broccoli, squash, cotton, cover green beans, field corn, and sweet corn. crops, North Carolina State University, Oregon State California- of University Tech, Texas University, Davis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Washington and State University. Research goals include improving the quality and yield of or ganic crops, including barley, wheat, quinoa, The Clif Bar Family Foundation is helping to fill fill to helping is Foundation Family Bar Clif The important gaps at our land grant universities fel breeding plant organic first the funding by lowships in the US. A total of 14 Ph.D. fellow ships have been funded at Cornell University, Funding the next generation of plant breeders organic $500,000 provided provided support over the years for organic breeding. Other federal programs and non-proft organicpublic breed in invested also have foundations and private ing and seed research. ing within university and NGO programs (see Figure 1). In particular, Integrated the OrganicUSDA’s Pro gram, which later became the Organic Research and Extension Initiative (OREI), and the Sustainable Agri program,have (SARE) Education and Research culture Figure 2. Funding for public organic plant breeding and other organic seed initia organic seed and other plant breeding public organic 2. Funding for Figure year tives by

Chapter 1: State of Organic Plant Breeding 18 Figure 3. Funding for public organic plant breeding and other organic Figureseed 3. initiatives Funding byfor topic public (1996 organic - 2018) plant breeding and other organic seed initiatives by topic (1996 - 2018)

Breeding / Variety Trials $27,505,286

Multi-Topic $1,562,058

Seed Production Research and Education $1,299,930

Policy and Systems Development $633,447

Enterprise Development $285,085

ceived the lowest amount of funding – a notable change. A total of 46 researchers responded to our survey. As The difference represents nearly a 13-fold increase in already mentioned, most of their projects were focused funding for multi-regional projects, demonstrating grow- on organic plant breeding and variety trials. This may ing interest in collaborative, multi-state projects. be in part due to farmer demand, as one researcher noted: “[Farmers] want to do variety trials, so this is what By crop type, vegetable projects received a large in- we do with them!” Research projects involving major crease in funding, receiving more than three times that crops (small grains and feld corn) focused exclusively of most other crops (see Figure 5). Wheat received on breeding and trials whereas projects associated with the most funding in our last analysis, yet over the last multiple vegetable crops included the widest range of fve years, that crop has seen only a modest increase in project types, such as seed production research, educa- funding. Other large increases were seen in corn, small tion, or systems development. grains, and legumes. Reported successes Clearly, investments in organic seed research have increased markedly since our 2011 report, but what are Researchers reported a variety of fndings. One of the the results of these investments? We conducted a sur- primary successes was the development or identifca- vey of the principal investigators for organic seed re- tion of germplasm, breeding lines, or populations. This search projects identifed in our analysis. We asked indicates that these research programs are gaining mo- these researchers questions that help us understand mentum in developing varieties for organic production systems. Several researchers reported that new varieties project successes, challenges, and opportunities for fu- State of Organic Seed, 2016 ture organic seed research. We also gathered informa- would be released in the near future, and nearly 30% tion about whether other stakeholders were involved of respondents indicated that research projects contrib- * and if new projects emerged from these investments. uted to the release of a fnished variety. (See Appendix A.3 for a list of the survey questions.) 19

* The reported success of 30% of projects contributing to the release of finished varieties shows improvement when compared to our 2011 report, where we reported “few projects produced finished varieties.” ------* annual event that continues to bring together a strong group of organic seed students and scien nascent still the support to professionals expanded recently SOSS industry. and field tific cre to symposium annual an from scope their ate a more formal society with the goal providing greater of networking and professional students current for opportunities development and post-graduates beginning their careers. The next generation of organic plant breeders get organized There is a new wave of sys seed and breeding plant organic studying graduate students tems. In 2012, some Symposium of these Seed students Organic orga Student first the nized (SOSS) with the purpose of bringing together other students from multiple universities who held the same interest, in addition to public and private breeders, policy advocates, and an now is SOSS representatives. industry seed Training Training graduate and undergraduate students is an other success reported in nearly 30% of projects. As one researcher described: “The long-term impact of this important educational element is to establish the next generation of extension, and industry researchers, representatives with organic systems expertise.” Addi important an as described was research organic tionally, recruitment tool for attracting new students. Though the number is still small, more universities are offer ing organic research programs in response to interest among students. with intellectual property. with intellectual property. The primary challenge reported was time and staff ca pacity. This wasn’t necessarily associated with insuff cient funding, though funding issues were still noted. Researchers reported needing longer-term funding to breeding plant their staffsupportfor infrastructure and programs. As one researcher said: “Without a strong Reported challenges proj their with challenges reported several Researchers ects. These challenges include time and staff capacity, insuffcient funding, access to appropriate feld loca tions, lack of expertise, and legal challenges associated - - - NT NT u u MO MO $982,519 $616,828 A A $3,727,097 $3,636,864 $3,601,476 $3,159,451 $2,754,533 $1,724,706 $1,192,854 $5,081,970 $4,374,631 $4,367,395 $3,033,142 $1,700,661 $10,506,306 $11,761,868 NG NG i i ND ND Fu Fu ON p i RO EG Multiple field crops Potato Corn Multiple small grains Other Wheat Legumes Figure 5. Funding for plant breeding and other organic public seed organic initiatives by crop (1996 - 2018) C Vegetables Multiple Southeast Southern Plains Northern Plains R Multi-region Pacific Northwest Midwest Northeast Figure 4. Funding for plant breeding and other public organic seed organic - 2018) initiatives by region (1996 * Organic universities Farming Research grant Foundation land tracks organic of programs in number the the US land shows grant assessment recent most Its system. university offering organic academic programs grew from zero to eight between 2003 and 2011. (Find the 2012 Organic Land Grant Assessment at www.ofrf.org) duce sales generated during trials and breeding. These forms of revenue have the potential to provide base level support for ongoing research. Several researchers indicated they were exploring the potential for earned releases. from future variety revenue der any formal protection. reportedof 15% that Researchers received projects the some amount of earned revenue. This revenue came pro and sales, seed varieties, released on royalties from provided earned revenue for some research projects. We asked what, ifused to release fnished varieties. Researchers reported any, intellectual Protection cer using license Plant agreements, Variety property tifcates, toolsand Open Source Seed Initiative pledges. were In other cases, researchers release didn’t the varieties un Releasing fnished organic outcome of varieties these investments. Finished varieties is also an important

Chapter 1: State of Organic Plant Breeding 20 core of essentially ‘permanent’ support, a breeding pro- participating in the development, execution, and analy- gram’s size is inherently constrained.” sis of projects. Farmer involvement was primarily seen in trials, and their involvement was described as criti- Access to appropriate testing locations was also report- cal. One researcher said this about farmer involvement: ed as a challenge by more than a quarter of respon- “We could not do this project without their involve- dents. This challenge included the availability and qual- ment. Helpful is not a strong enough word. They are re- ity of organic research sites as well as locations with quired partners.” Another researcher said that projects appropriate pest pressures. Producing enough seed was that empower farmers are important for promoting the a challenge for breeding and variety trialing projects, in- development of varieties outside the restrictive frame- dicating a need for access to more locations for organic work of university-led projects. seed production. The lack of specifc expertise included data analysis and trial design as well as crop-specifc In farmer-led and collaborative projects, academic and knowledge within a region or institution. non-proft researchers contributed expertise on specifc crop, pest, or methodology (15%) and assisted in project Finally, restricted access to germplasm due to intellec- design (13%). End-users were primarily engaged in eval- tual property rights was reported as a legal challenge. uation (11%) as well as defning objectives (7%). Seed One researcher described the issue this way: “Restric- companies played a role in multiple aspects. tive licenses for germplasm, bag tags that specifed no breeding or seed saving and the like, were obstacles in Current investments using some of the … cultivars we wished to use.” As we will explain later in this report, intellectual property It’s encouraging to see increased funding in federal rights remain a barrier to organic seed innovation. programs like OREI, especially since this program has been the biggest contributor to public organic breed- Reported opportunities ing initiatives. But it’s important to note how these investments compare to current funding for non-organic Some opportunities identifed by researchers include seed research (see Figure 18 in Chapter 3). more basic research directed toward organic production, including developing molecular markers for dis- Furthermore, breeding programs that overly rely on ease resistance and investigating traits important to one federal grant program are in a vulnerable position. organic systems, such as weed competitiveness. Other To illustrate, OREI was created in the 2002 Farm Bill needs identifed by researchers include: addressing to fund research, education, and extension projects that seed-borne diseases, expanding organic land on uni- enhance the ability of organic producers and proces- versity research farms, fnding new avenues for com- sors to grow and market high-quality organic agricul- mercializing varieties, and disseminating variety trial tural products. The program was reauthorized with results. There’s strong potential for continued research mandatory funding in the 2008 Farm Bill. Due to in- as 65% of respondents said their work had contributed fghting, Congress was unable to pass the next Farm to new projects. Bill on time, and OREI’s authorization and funding expired on September 30, 2012. OREI became one Reported stakeholders of several “stranded” programs caused by the delay in passing what’s now the 2014 Farm Bill. Congress even- Researchers reported strong stakeholder involvement. tually reauthorized the program and provided $20 mil- State of Organic Seed, 2016 Nearly 90% of respondents reported that other stake- lion annually for fve years in mandatory OREI fund- holders were involved in their research, including farming. Still, the research community lost an entire year of ers (72%), public sector and non-proft researchers funding in 2013, and the situation created uncertainty (33%), end-users (13%), and seed companies (13%).* for many organic breeding programs. These stakeholders played a variety of roles, from iden- 21 tifying the needs and objectives of the project to fully

* By “end-users” we mean processors, such as bakers, millers, maltsters, consumers, and food companies. 5 ------Another survey 4 * involvement. Helpful is not a strong enough strong a not is Helpful involvement. word. They are required partners.’ More than 70% of the organic seed research seed organic the of 70% than More projects conducted over the last five years ‘We shared, researcher One farmers. involved could not do this project without [farmer] Because some seed companies are reluctant to enter, or enter, to reluctant are companies seed some Because increase investments in, organic plant breeding, fund university provides organic research ing for public seed and NGO plant breeders an important opportunity to of domain the the be otherwise may that crops research private sector. These investments are also training the next generation of Furthermore, public breeders. plant plant breeders report that organic research programs, such as provide some USDA-OREI, of the only fund ing for classical plant breeding projects where the end environ to specifc adapted varieties is improved goal and climates. conditions mental confdent their position would continue. confdent their position would This trend has for dire our consequences seed sup ply and broader food system. Publicly funded breed counterparts private their than freedom more have ers to address critical – yet potentially less lucrative – re search that benefts smaller markets, such as organic agriculture and minor crops. Growing Growing interest in organic agriculture is trend a in positive what otherwise are troubling changes within our university breeding programs. continue These to play programs a critical role in agricultural of innova risk shows at survey One extinction. they’re yet tion, that the number of plant university breeders has fallen more than 30% in the last 20 years. As these breeders retire, there aren’t enough younger breeders currently in the system to maintain this level of cultivar development. When asked if their institu after work development cultivar their continue will tion they retire or otherwise their leave position, more than half of the breeders responding to the survey weren’t shows that as these breeders retire, there aren’t enough that shows as these breeders there retire, aren’t younger breeders in the system to maintain their pro grams. Of 192 public plant breeders releasing fnished more. or years 21 for working been have 55% cultivars, ------In addition to these breeding projects, two con two projects, breeding these to addition In 3 are also unable to meet demand. For example, the Agri the example, For demand. meet to unable also are largest the (AFRI), Initiative Research Food and culture federal program more funding plant breeding, received than 170 proposals for plant breeding related projects in 2014. There were only enough funds to awards. grant six This is just one reason why the needs organic more community diverse funding sources for organic seed de is reason important Another 23). page (see research of mand. Most OREI proposals are related funded the to organic breeding projects. Other federal programs Chapter 3, urging the USDA to prioritize classical breed classical prioritize to USDA the urging 3, Chapter an remains development cultivar public and projects ing essential component of organic seed advocacy. news, news, to be sure, yet an ongoing challenge with AFRI largely which is grants are how funds these allocated, committees. review grant the on serves who on depends seen more We’ve AFRI plant breeding dollars directed toward genomics and other lab-based in methods As explained at the breeding. of expense feld-based great Foundation investments typicallymuch larger budgets. fund projects with The December 2015 budget bill also included a sig ofincrease nifcant $25 for million AFRI. This is great ommendation ommendation that it be funded at $60 million. Clearly SARE we amount. have a intended long its way at to go funded tois research, ensure program scale that grant this smaller critical for niche important an fll grants including breeding and seed work largelythat’s farm er-driven, whereas AFRI, OREI, and Clif Bar Family For example, in Decemberfnal budget deal that included 2015,an extra $2 million to Congress passedward SARE, bringing the fundinga to $24.7 million, the highest level of funding since the program was rec the with passed originally was cre SARE 1988. in ated the other in the Pacifc Northwest. These conference his in funding ofAFRI some representonly grants the tory organic agriculture. directed toward Fortunately we’re making some progresspublic plant in breeding increasing investments by program area. ference grants were awarded to identify organic plant- breeding priorities by region: one in the Northeast and where the majority of funding has gone toward genomics tap and are lab-based breeders that methods funding of and pools other are There breeding. field-based toward not support helps that funding commodity including projects, breeding classical for into ping variety development in crops like sorghum, soybeans, and potatoes. * This sentiment has been expressed by a number of public breeders funding in response priorities to established by other agricultural research programs, including AFRI,

Chapter 1: State of Organic Plant Breeding 22 More organic food companies are investing in organic seed

Since our last report, we’ve seen more interest and investment from organic food companies – from processors to distributors to retail. Take Organi- cally Grown Company (OGC), the largest organic produce distributor in the Pacific Northwest. OGC approached Organic Seed Alliance’s research team about organically breeding varieties of purple sprouting broccoli. The project quickly took off thanks to their support. The project goal is to provide Pacific Northwest growers with regionally adapted organic seed for winter food production, as the broccoli is harvested at a time when little diversity in fresh produce is available. The project has now grown to include researchers at Oregon State University and Washington State University, and has attracted additional funding from two state specialty crop block grant programs. Chefs and other stakeholders are also participating in variety tastings to inform breeding decisions. Currently, there are few organic and open-pollinated purple sprouting broccoli varieties in the marketplace. Soon growers will have several varieties to choose from – all organically bred.

Also in the Pacific Northwest, the Port Townsend Food Co-op, recognizing the challenge of growing sweet corn in the region’s relatively cool climate, is partly funding a breeding project to adapt ‘Who Gets Kissed?’ organic sweet corn to the Olympic Peninsula. Collaborators include the University of Wisconsin-Madison breeders who developed ‘Who Gets Kissed?’ and other breeding lines as well as the Northern Organic Vegetable Improvement Col- laborative (NOVIC). The goal is to create an early maturing, open-pollinated organic sweet corn variety that thrives in the maritime climate. Collaborators aim to release varieties to the marketplace in the next few years.

In 2015, Lundberg Family Farm, known in the marketplace for their organic rice products, contributed funds to support two graduate students in organic quinoa breeding. Washington State University’s Agricultural Research Center provided a generous match to the Lundberg graduate fellowships. One of the fellows tested various quinoa varieties for agronomic characteristics and yield in partnership with organic farms in western Washington. This research also included a focus on weed control in organic quinoa production using transplants and geese as potentially beneficial tools for organic quinoa farmers. The second fellow worked with organic farmers in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington on variety trials, comparing the effect of natural selection versus farmer-assisted selection. This fellow is also looking at the association between quinoa roots and microbial communities in the soil to identify potential benefits derived from variety-specific mycorrhizal associations.

Also in 2015, Clif Bar & Company and Organic Valley established the na- State of Organic Seed, 2016 tion’s first endowed chair focused on organic plant breeding. The recipient was the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and the endowment will be funded in perpetuity with a $1 million gift from the companies and a $1 million match from a UW alumni couple. Clif Bar & Company has committed to funding four additional endowed chairs by 2020. 23 ------

** These fgures are used to boast the success of Bayh- Dole and to claim that the law was necessary for im proving technology transfer of patenting increased demonstrating numbers But search. publicly funded re and licensing of university research and increased in come don’t necessarily mean more outputs are being that or served, being is good public the that transferred, profts are coming back to research and development In programs. fact, evidence has emerged that challenge these supposed benefts. mal plant breeders. In fact, several requests for proposals proposals for requests several fact, In breeders. plant mal from USDA and non-profts that fund plant breeding – including the Agriculture and Food Research Initia tive (AFRI), Organic Research and Extension Initiative Foundation OrganictheFarming Research and (OREI), Participatory plant breeding Participatory plant The growth in organic plant breeding has growth in paralleled participatory approaches to breeding in the US and Europe. These approaches are documented in a growing body of scientifc literature and extension resources on the topic. According to our survey of re searchers described above, farmers play a number of and projects developing from projects, research in roles fndings. methods to evaluating Participatory plant breeding (PPB) is an approach farmers collaborate where with formal breeders on breeding and variety At evaluation. times other are stakeholders involved, such as seed companies, food processors, re tail food companies, and chefs. In this Ag model, organic USDA’s university, with partnership in farmerswork indus private and non-proft, Service, Research riculture try plant breeders to improve seed for organic farmers to a take empowers lead breeding farms. Participatory their combining by varieties seed new developing in role practical experience with the technical expertise of for Intellectual property rights are a barrier to seed innova barrierseed a to are property rights Intellectual tion. In both the public and private breeding sectors, intellectual property rights inhibit breeders’ and farm ers’ freedom to operate. As explained in increased Chapter privatization of 3, seed has devastating conse addressed. quences and the problem needs to be ------

10 Sum * 7 Private dona Private Century Agriculture Summit, including the full proceedings, visit www.rafiusa.org. Century Agriculture Summit, 6 st Century Agriculture co st Universities now earn al 9 There’s also no doubt that university research 8 tions now provide nearly a quarter of the funding agricultural grant land at research universities. for * For more information about the 2014 Seeds & Breeds for 21 lished. Industry not funding be for may some public research thing to criticize on its especially own, with diminished public funding, but private investments can come with strings attached, such as having the power to dictate whether research fndings are kept private or pub The Seeds & Breeds for 21 oneer Hi-Bred – to the Texas A&M Department of Department Soil A&M Texas the to – Hi-Bred oneer and Crop Sciences made up 56% of the department’s research grants between 2006 and 2010. ganic agriculture but are losing the capacity to do so. ganicagriculture losing the capacity to do so. but are As public funding of university programs steadily creased de over the years, industry-funded research at uni versities increased. For example,Pi and Inc., Cotton corporationsMonsanto, – three just the contributions of ers, ers, intellectual property restrictions, and aging public All of to seed name collections, a few. these challenges have affected our public plant breeding infrastructure broadly, and organic plant breeding specifcally. Many programs are interested in addressing the needs of or mit participants and the resulting proceedings identi ofdecline the to public contributed that challenges fed seed available to farmers, including breed plant shrinking public fewer breeding, classical for funding public ** The Brookings Institution concluded that, in any given year, the revenue funneled into university budgets from patents and licensing deals is not enough to cover the cost of running of cost the cover to enough not is deals licensing and patents from budgets university into funneled revenue the year, given any in that, concluded Institution Brookings The ** most technology transfer office (see “University Start-Ups: Critical for Improving Technology Transfer” http://www.brookings.edu). most $2 billion annually from licensing research. most $2 billion annually alition held a summit in 2014 to discuss the state our of seed supply and develop re-building recommendations our public breeding for infrastructure. seminate knowledge. Between 1980 and 1990, the num the 1990, and 1980 Between knowledge. seminate 300 from jumped universities to of ber awarded patents a year to more than 3,000. Act, which encourages universities to patent and license and patent to universities encourages which Act, public research as opposed to placing that research in the public domain. Prior to Bayh-Dole, most universi ties were reluctant to patent and license their research for fear of compromising their commitment to “open science” and their institutional mission to broadly dis has become increasingly privatized over the last quarter- last the over privatized increasingly become has century. The shift in US policy toward stronger rights for intellectual property owners fostered the privati zation of public research, as did the 1980 Bayh-Dole

Chapter 1: State of Organic Plant Breeding 24 (OFRF) – now encourage proposals that include partici- development of varieties appropriate for their system. patory plant breeding methods, incentivizing researchers From our farmer survey, further described in Chapter 2, and farmers to embrace this collaborative model. This most respondents indicate that they want their organic decentralized model of breeding is resulting in varieties seed purchases to encourage organic breeding and they that meet the needs of local producers and consumers, believe breeding for organic systems is important to the and more farmers gaining skills to develop their own va- overall success of organic agriculture. About a quar- rieties (see sidebar). ter of farmers who responded said they’re interested in on-farm plant breeding regardless of whether there is Most of the researchers who responded to our survey economic opportunity. use participatory methods. The signifcant interest in applying participatory models to organic plant breeding Farmer-initiated organic breeding projects that are not may be attributed to several factors. The organic seed funded by public or private programs aren’t captured industry is still nascent and while a few larger compa- in this report. However, it’s important to note that doz- nies have entered the market and mid-size companies ens of farmer-bred varieties are currently offered in or- are professionalizing their operations, there are still ganic seed catalogs. An analysis of these contributions many companies that rely on seed producers to collabo- to organic seed availability will be worth considering rate on variety improvement and maintenance. For this for the next State of Organic Seed report, slated for 2021. reason, many organic seed producers are accustomed to engaging in feld selection and crop evaluation. Fur- As mentioned, more than 70% of the researchers re- thermore, smaller, diversifed organic seed companies sponding to our survey reported farmer engagement. often lack hybrid breeding programs and rely on open- Farmers hosted research trials or breeding projects in pollinated varieties that lend themselves more readily to 50% of the projects. However, only 30% of the re- on-farm plant breeding and variety improvement. searchers reported that farmers were involved in the evaluation of projects – a reminder that most organic Organic producers are also required to use organic seed seed research is researcher-driven. when available, so many are motivated to support the Participatory plant breeding offers formal plant breeders the potential to conduct breeding in realistic on-farm Participatory breeding gets results conditions and to learn from the expertise of farmers. Organic farms provide necessary access to real, work- Participatory research has already resulted in ing organic systems for testing and variety develop- a number of new organic varieties now avail- ment, and on-farm selection may increase adaptation able in the marketplace. One example includes to local organic farming conditions. However, as noted ‘Solstice’ broccoli, an open-pollinated variety re- earlier, more than a quarter of the researchers reported leased in 2012 and developed through a partici- that they lacked access to certifed organic land and that patory plant breeding project involving Jonathan this was a barrier to the success of their work. Com- Spero of Lupine Knoll farm in Oregon and Jim Myers of Oregon State University. A second ex- pared to conventional systems, organic farming systems ample is ‘Who Gets Kissed?’ sweet corn, an may have more variable environments both within and open-pollinated and organically bred variety that across farm sites, including more variable pest and disease pressures, microclimates, soil conditions, and nu-

was commercially released in 2014. University of State of Organic Seed, 2016 Wisconsin-Madison breeders worked with Martin trient availability. With these variable environments, Diffley of Organic Farming Works farm in Min- farmer involvement helps lead to more successful feld nesota and Organic Seed Alliance to develop evaluations, as the farmers may have a better ability to this variety as part of the Northern Organic Veg- identify individual plants in their felds that are thriving etable Improvement Collaborative. And a third due to their genetics rather than due to the chance of 25 example is ‘FBC Dylan’ wheat, bred in partner- being planted in a better feld site on the farm. ship between the Northern Plains Sustainable Agriculture Society’s Farm Breeding Club and a private breeder. ------* Further research is 12 to support researchers and farmers in Other research, including the Carrot Im 11 Participatory Plant Breeding Toolkit * Training farmers and plant breeders in participatory plant breeding methods was identi was methods breeding plant participatory in breeders plant and farmers Training * fied as a recommendation in our 2011 report. Since then, Organic Seed Alliance published has a developing projects using these methods gaps in organic seed availability. availability. seed organic in gaps Some research has demonstrated a difference in the way varieties perform in organic versus conventional systems. that have specifc qualities demanded by their markets. Variety trials help them minimize the provide risk of adopting they varieties farmers in trials conducted organic Variety tried before. haven’t performanceas companies seed and breeders plant help also systems data that sess the performance of organic varieties and identify Not all organic systems are alike. Climate, soil type, and and type, soil Climate, alike. are systems organic all Not nutrient management vary by farm and region. why organic variety trials That’sare particularly important for helping farmers identify new and that existing varieties perform best on their farm and in their region, and which which varieties are ideal for organic production which and varieties need improvement. Variety trials help breeders and other researchers identify varieties with useful traits for plant breeding projects. Organic variety trials Organic variety Beyond breeding in organic systems, a there need for remains more variety testing of both conventional varieties in organic organic systems to and determine fed crop operations that are spread across the country and serve regional and local markets. There is a need to fulfll a wide range of plant breeding objectives for different environments and diversity wide markets. the Participatory address to ap opportunity an are proaches of way. in an economical needs breeding Lastly, while Lastly, there are areas of diversi large-scale, industrial or highly are farms organic many production, ganic provement provement for Organic Agriculture found signifcant project, differences in hasn’t the performance varieties ofacross farming systems. conditions and practices. conditions and practices. needed to better understand why there are differences advancing in breeders assist to projects across results in supportthat performancetraits superior organicunder

Chapter 1: State of Organic Plant Breeding 26 A number of variety trial networks have been created or coordinating a testing program to evaluate public and expanded since our 2011 report. Many of these networks private corn germplasm for the organic and non-trans- have been supported through the research investments genic grain industries. Members include public breed- discussed earlier in this chapter, and are multi-regional. ers, private/independent breeders, seed retailers, and A few examples that are currently funded through US- researchers. The network has experienced tremendous DA’s OREI program include: Carrot Improvement for growth in feld locations and membership, which grew Organic Agriculture, Eastern Sustainable Organic Cu- from 19 members in 2012 to 30 in 2015. USTN now curbit Project, Northern Organic Vegetable Improve- includes 64 testing locations across 14 states. In 2015, ment Collaborative (NOVIC), and the Tomato Organic 13 of these locations were certifed organic (in 2009, Management and Improvement Project. only seven locations were organic). USTN is interested in expanding organic testing to more locations but is Examples of older and more established variety trial fnding it diffcult to identify certifed organic ground networks include the Northern Plains Sustainable Agri- across all regions. culture Society’s Farm Breeding Club (FBC). Started in 1999, and based in the Dakotas, farmer members deter- Other regional variety trial networks have been estab- mine breeding projects and goals, and connect with one lished in the Pacifc Northwest (vegetables), Montana another and with researchers to actively improve, save, (vegetables), and California (wheat and vegetables). and share seed. Coordinator Frank Kutka says FBC has These regional networks are relatively new, as is a na- become more organized in the last fve years and now tional network called the Experimental Farm Network, has funding and university partners for organic variety established in 2013 with the mission of “fghting global trials and preliminary breeding of einkorn, emmer, cow- climate change and ensuring food security far into the pea, grain sorghum, radish, and vegetables. The club future by facilitating collaboration on plant breeding actively leads and engages in educational events, includ- and other agricultural research.” One of the network’s ing webinars, workshops, and feld days. FBC members objectives is to create an open and easy-to-use platform released the previously-mentioned new bread wheat va- for participatory breeding by connecting researchers riety known as ‘FBC Dylan’, a modern and tasty type and growers across the US. that does well in the region under organic conditions. Access to a central location for organic variety trial infor- Another example of a variety trial network driven by a mation was identifed as a need in our 2011 report. Since non-proft organization with a farmer membership base that time, OSA and NOVIC research partners developed is the Practical Farmers of Iowa’s US Testing Network a national database of organic variety trial reports. It can (USTN). USTN began in 2009 with the purpose of be found at http://varietytrials.eorganic.info/. State of Organic Seed, 2016

27 ------Beyond or Beyond Congress should Participatory plant breeding

organic agriculture in the US. Address the lack of other of or organic resourcesbulk seed the research directedreceiving priorities is which toward breeding, plant ganic ganic seed investments, research is desperately needed in the areas of organic seed production, seed-borne diseases, organic seed economics, and other priorities of SARE, USDA-OREI, RMA, AFRI, and other fed eral programs. These programs should encourage re quests that encourage requests that emphasize organic farmerinvolvement, participatoryapproaches, systems, development, and cultivar training the next generation of plant Furthermore,breeders. should the es USDA tablish a separate funding area within AFRI focused solely on public cultivar development. Prioritize successful models and approaches organic plant to breeding methods are well-suited to organic breeding projects, been have that loops feedback essential re-establish and lost. Organic breeding needs different approaches not just because the production systems are different from conventional systems but because the values and prin ciples of organic agriculture are different as well, from methods excluded in the organic standards to ensuring that seed innovation is shared and made public. Addi tional research in the methods, impacts, and outcomes of participatory plant breeding is needed to refne and train plant breeders and farmers in this approach for retailers and processors to sponsor regional organic regional sponsor to processors and va retailers riety trials, organic breeding projects, and organic seed trainings for farmers. These investments support the success of the farmers growing their products, beneft indus organic the support and feed, they customers the try more broadly. Increase public investments in organic breeding and other organic seed research increase federal funding – and provide funding project by for – organic longer plant breeding as part term ------report, the While investments

State State of Organic Seed critical — yet potentially less lucrative — research that benefits organic agriculture organic agriculture that benefits — research less lucrative — yet potentially critical Publicly funded breeders have more freedom than their private counterparts to address to their private counterparts freedom than have more funded breeders Publicly and education. Still, examples of this are few and far between. There are countless opportunities for food crease public funding from existing sources while iden tifying new funding including sources, from the private sector. Since the frst organic industry has become more aware of the need and has in increased investments organic seed research Recommendations Increase private investments in organic breeding and other organic seed research in organic plant breeding are on the rise, they’re keeping not up with demand. There remains a need to in ress in organic Through plant surveys, listen breeding. ing sessions, and interviews with public plant breeders rec following the identifed we’ve companies, seed and plant organic nation’s our improving for ommendations breeding infrastructure. 20 years ago. These programs are essential for sup porting organic seed innovation and for training the next generation of plant breeders. prog slowing are ofthat number challenges a are There with organic principles. Small- companies and supplying mid-sized organic seed seed often don’t have funds for organic breeding programs and therefore rely on larger companies with organic breeding pro univer our Meanwhile, sector. public the and grams sityplant-breeding infrastructure isweaker than itwas public and private players and, importantly, farmers. farmers. and, importantly, players public and private The goal of be should to plant breeding organic ef fciently develop plant varieties that meet the needs of organic agriculture while using methods that align Though still in its infancy, organic plant breeding has grown into a scientifc feld and ing this industry. growth to Maintain ensure organic farmers have variet ies that are better adapted to their systems will require more investment and a coordinated strategy between Summary

Chapter 1: State of Organic Plant Breeding 28 identifed by farmers, seed companies, and research- agreements can remove plant genetics from the pool of ers. Our research analysis described in this chapter only resources breeders rely on to innovate. Patents and li- uncovered a handful of projects related to seed pro- censing costs also add fnancial and administrative bur- duction, policy, seed system development, and other dens. Furthermore, breeders worry about unintentional non-breeding projects. patent infringement since it’s diffcult to know for sure what’s protected under broad patents. Intellectual prop- Expand the infrastructure of public and private erty models used in the public breeding sector should organic plant breeding programs Breeders say they not impinge on a breeder’s and farmer’s freedom to op- have limited access to appropriate certifed organic acre- erate. Licenses can be written so that they retain the age, winter nurseries, and greenhouses to conduct trials rights of the breeder, including royalty returns, while and breeding work. This includes access to organic re- allowing other breeders to use the variety for breeding search sites with appropriate pest pressures and access and allowing farmers to save seed. to locations for organic seed production. There is a need to further investigate the barriers to adequately address Improve access to GMO-free breeding material for them. Breeders also report needing stable, longer-term at-risk crops Breeders need access to more breeding funding to support staff and infrastructure. All of these lines for major crops, especially corn, that are appro- factors slow the organic breeding process and create priate for organic seed production. Part of the prob- barriers for getting more universities involved in organic lem, at least in hybrid seed corn production, is limited plant breeding. access to high-quality parent lines due to the unwilling- ness of the largest genetics companies to license more Develop and expand existing organic variety trials proprietary lines in an untreated form. Furthermore, at the regional and national level There is a need to contamination is diffcult to avoid in some breeding improve the coordination and dissemination of variety lines, especially corn, and the burden of testing for trial results. This includes private-public partnerships contamination remains solely on the shoulders of the that allow seed companies lacking breeding budgets to organic community. identify and access breeding material from universities and coordinate with other companies. Farmers and re- Create systems for releasing new organic varieties searchers also need updated resources on how best to to the commercial marketplace As new varieties are conduct successful variety trials, including guidance on developed by public breeders and by farmer-breed- making evaluations more consistent, rigorous, and use- ers, mechanisms need to be developed to help these ful. Regional variety trial networks are emerging, but varieties get into the hands of farmers. Improving they need more fnancial support to increase coordina- commercialization pipelines will require more coordi- tion, reporting, and the dissemination of fndings. nation and support to get new varieties tested, produced, distributed, and maintained. This includes bet- Develop and promote fair intellectual property ter networking between breeders and seed companies, models Restrictive practices regarding intellectual coordinated testing networks, systems for quality as- property rights can slow innovation in plant breeding. surance and stock seed management, and streamlined For example, utility patents and restrictive licensing intellectual property and royalty negotiations. State of Organic Seed, 2016

29 ------2 Chapter rganic plant breeding has limited value until vari avail are genetics improved these containing eties this survey in 2009 and then again in 2014. By conduct By 2014. in again then and 2009 in survey this ing this survey every fve years, we’re able to measure progress in meeting the organic seed needs of organic farmers. The fndings that follow represent the fve-year frst update to this national For survey. a descrip tion of our survey methods and full set of Appendix D. data, see able able to farmers in the form of and seed in high-quality suffcient quantities. That’s why commercial seed pro duction is integral to organic seed systems. Producing special requires organically, especially seed, high-quality skills and experience. It also requires proper isolation distances and specialized equipment and storage. One of the most pressing needs for building the availability of organic seed is expanding seed production knowl edge andcrop capacitytype and region.by As mentioned, demand for organic seed is growing. Sales of organic products totaled more than $43 bil lion in 2015, an 11% increase compared to 2014. Food purchases represent $39.7 billion of this total. the Yet organic seed supply keeping isn’t up with this growth, and most organic farmers still rely on conventionally produced seed for at least part of their operation. surveynational a through conclusion this at arrived We of certifed organic crop farmers. We frst conducted O State of Organic State of Seed Supply

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 30 Below we break down our fndings by crop type and We made a new effort in 2014 to gather responses then explore farmer perceptions, actions, and experi- from a random sample through a separate survey.* The ences regarding organic seed. The survey questions responses between the two surveys were very close – were designed to collect information in the areas of (1) mostly within a couple percentage points. This separate farm demographics, (2) organic seed usage, (3) chal- survey adds more credibility to our fndings and gives lenges in sourcing organic seed, and (4) the potential us confdence that farmers responding to our national for increasing the availability of organic seed. Addition- survey weren’t necessarily only those who are more al questions captured farmers’ perceptions of organic willing to use organic seed. seed and which crops and traits should be prioritized by organic plant breeding programs, among other ques- How much organic seed is being used? tions that help to inform our understanding of the state of organic seed systems in the US. One question we asked in the survey was whether farmers had decreased or increased the percentage of organ- Who took our organic seed survey? ic seed they used over the last three years (2011-2013). Across crop types, 27% of farmers responding said First, farm demographics: We received survey respons- they’re already using 100% organic seed. This demon- es from 1,365 organic farmers representing 47 states strates a minor improvement compared to 2009 data, (approximately 300 more than our 2009 survey). Most where we documented that 20% of farmers were using respondents were from the West Coast, Midwest, and 100% organic seed. East Coast. California was under-represented, and we had fewer respondents from the Midwest this time, By crop type, vegetable growers demonstrated the most though in 2009 the Midwest was over-represented. This effort in improving their sourcing of organic seed. time around respondents more closely refect the actual Nearly half (46%) of vegetable growers reported that relative numbers of organic farms in the different parts they’ve increased their use of organic seed over the of the US. We are comfortable claiming that 10% of last three years. About one-third of feld crop grow- certifed organic farmers in the US responded to our ers and cover crop growers, and one-quarter of forage survey based on the USDA’s 2014 Organic Production crop growers, reported they’ve increased their sourcing Survey. Most respondents were certifed organic for of organic seed. Still, vegetables lag behind in an im- less than ten years, but there were more long-time certi- portant way. Only 18% of vegetable growers reported fed farmers (certifed 11-30+ years) responding to our planting 100% organic seed. Compare this to 30% who 2014 survey than in 2009. reported planting 100% organic seed for feld crops, forage crops, and cover crops. Below we further break down this data by crop type (see Table 1 and Figure 6).

Table 1. Over the last three years (2011-2013) have you decreased/increased the percentage of organic seed that you use in the following crop types?

VEGETAbLES FiELD FORAGE COVER CROpS/ ACROSS ALL CROpS CROpS GREEN MANuRE CROpS CROpS TypES

Already at 100% 18% 30% 30% 29% 27% State of Organic Seed, 2016 Increased the per- 46% 29% 25% 30% 31% centage About the same 31% 38% 42% 38% 36% percentage

Decreased the per- 5% 3% 3% 2% 6% 31 centage

* Colleagues who reviewed our 2011 report pointed out the potential weakness of our data given the risk that farmers who chose to respond to the survey might be more supportive of organic seed than those not responding. This random sample survey was one way to address this concern and add more credibility to our 2016 findings. - - 69 All Crops All 58 66

clover, alfalfa, grass : 49 : buckwheat, vetch, oats Cover Crops : wheat, soybeans, corn tomatoes, lettuce/greens, squash lettuce/greens, tomatoes, : CROPS

CROPS

OVER EGETABLES IELD ORAGE 59 Top three crops planted by farmers responding to our survey V F C F

2014 Challenges in sourcing are farmersorganicorganicof number why a reasons are There seed not using more organic seed. The most signifcant rea unavailable are varieties specifc include: gave they sons in an organic form, there are insuffcient quantities in ofseed, there is a lack and price. desirable traits, wheat (89%) and the lowest in ryewheat (89%) and the lowest (75%). Forage crops Fewer respondents planted foragecompared cropsto 2009 in(48%). 2014Half (38%)of these respondents had less than 80 acres in forage 61% crops. of On forage average, crop growers planted their acreage to organicseed.This represented realimprovementnoin forage crop acreage planted to organic seed compared to the 2009 data. seed. The highest use of organic seed was seen in buck in of seen use was highest The seed organic seed. 61 Forage Crops by crop type type by crop - - - 2009 78

72 Field Crops 69 Figure 6. Average percent acreage planted to organic seed seed to organic planted acreage percent 6. Average Figure 55 Vegetable Crops Vegetable

10 60 50 40 30 20 80 70 90 responding farmers farmers responding Average percent acreage planted to organic seed by by seed organic to planted acreage percent Average Figure 6. Average percent acreage planted to organic seed to organic planted acreage percent 6. Average Figure Seventy Seventy percent of farmers responding to acres. 50 our than less surveyhad most and acreage, crop cover had Halforgan 100% ofplanted growers crop cover these ic crop cover seed, but 15% reported using no organic Most respondents Most had respondents less than 80 acres in feld crops, whereas 13% ofrespondents had more than 480. Acre 2009 fndings. similar to the age were totals Cover crops when compared to our 2009 fndings, but this is likely because we had fewer respondents from the Midwest. On average, feld crop growers More planted 2009. in 78% 72% to compared of seed organic to acreage their encouraging is that 56% reported using 100% organic seed for feld crop acreage compared to 47% in 2009. Field crops About half of the farmers responding to our grew survey feld crops. The number was less signifcantly spondents represent less vegetable acreage compared to 2009. Most respondents had three or fewer in acres vegetables. On average, farmers reported planting about 70% of their vegetable acreage to organic seed. This represents a signifcant increase from 2009, when 55%. it was Vegetables farmers of vegetable percentage higher slightly a had We responding to our survey in 2014 than in 2009 – about half of respondents grew vegetables, though these re

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 32 Although price is not an allowable reason for not sourc- nity for identifying and fulflling gaps in organic seed avail- ing organic seed under the organic standards, it remains ability. Too often these contracts require varieties unavail- a reported reason for organic farmers, though slightly able in an organic form. These relationships are also an less of a reason than we found in our 2009 survey. opportunity to communicate crop improvement priorities directly to breeding and seed production companies, since All of these challenges are generally consistent across farming challenges and market needs change. crop type but there are exceptions in vegetables worth noting. Most notable is how organic seed usage changes as acreage increases (see Figure 7). We found a gen- Across all crop types, more than 30% of eral trend toward lower organic seed use among larger farmers responding to our survey are using versus smaller vegetable growers. The difference is sig- more organic seed than they were three nifcant – farmers with less than 10 acres in vegetables years ago on average plant 75% of their acreage to organic seed. Farmers with more than 480 acres in vegetables on average only plant 20% of their acreage to organic seed. Although more organic farmers report increasing their use of organic seed, from 2009 until now there is a gen- With the exception of seed saving, the general trend eral trend toward less total acreage planted to organic for vegetable growers is that the reasons they’re not us- seed across all farms. Unfortunately, the small sample ing organic seed become more signifcant as acreage size in our survey of large-scale producers makes it im- increases. The biggest differences between small and possible to say this defnitively.* The takeaway is that large vegetable operations is that larger operations had we see farmers using more organic seed, but the opera- more problems with the quantity of seed available, a tions still use relatively little and that has a big impact on buyer demanding a particular variety, price, or lack of overall acres planted to organic seed. desirable traits available in an organic variety. USDA data show that the number of certifed organic In feld crops, larger growers have more problems with farms increased as organic acreage decreased between the quantity of seed, buyers demanding particular va- 2008 and 2014.13 There appears to be an increase in rieties, and seed quality. Larger feld crop growers are larger certifed organic farms and a decrease in small or- also less likely to buy organic seed because they’re saving ganic farms that are exempt from the standards (farms their own. We did not fnd similar trends in forage crops. that sell less than $5,000 in organic products annually). The fact that organic farms are increasing in size may It’s not surprising that seed quantity is an issue for larger not be bad in and of itself. However, this trend may scale farmers regardless of crop type. Buyer requirements serve as an obstacle to increasing acreage planted to are also an issue for larger operations of all crop types. organic seed given the slow progress we’re making in These contracts, where organic food processors require increasing organic seed usage among larger operations. that specifc varieties be grown, is an important opportu-

Figure 7. Organic vegetable seed use by acreage 75 51 51 30 75 51 48 51 30

20 State of Organic Seed, 2016 48 20

0.01-10 11-50 51-80 81-160 161-480 >480 33

planted to organic seed 0.01-10 11-50 Total vegetable acreage of respondents 51-80 81-160 161-480 >480 planted to organic seed Average percent vegetable acres Total vegetable acreage of respondents

* We only had 13 responding farmers growing more than 160 acres of vegetables. Average percent vegetable acres -

* 23% 3% Organic plant breeding priorities traits three crops and by top weeds with competitiveness competitiveness CROPS AND TRAITS: TOP FIELD germination, resistance/tolerance, yield, CORN: disease yield, SOY: nutrient weeds, with weeds with competitiveness yield, WHEAT: use efficiency yield flavor, AND TRAITS: TOP VEGETABLE CROPS resistance/tolerance, disease TOMATOES: yield, resistance/tolerance, disease BRASSICAS: appearance SQUASH: disease resistance/tolerance, yield, appearance, quality in need of Organicorganic plant breeding. breeding pri as 2009 fndings. same the almost remain orities The majority of respondents report that there are crops crops are there that report of majority The respondents Importantly, farmers report being more satisfed with the the with satisfed more being report farmers Importantly, ofquality the using organic (see seed Figure they’re 8). of three-quarters to farmers responding Approximately the quality seed same about having our reported survey seed. conventional untreated, versus organic with issues reported also Farmers fndings. 2009 with line in is This ------73% n general, do you have more problems with seed quality issues in non- i seed are greater than with organic seed non-treated conventional and organic seed Problems with organic seed are greater than with non-treated conventional seed Problems with non-treated conventional Problems are about the same for both Figure 8. In general, do you have more problems with seed quality Figure 8. In general, do you have seed or organic seed? issues in non-treated conventional Figure 8. or organic seed? treated conventional seed * Plant breeding priorities were nearly the same as the 2009 findings, although alfalfa was rated above wheat and uniformity was rated above yield for brassicas and squash in our last report. tegrityof organic productionoffood(85% respondents statements). of these both with agreed or agreed strongly seed purchases to encourage organic breeding. This fnd This organicbreeding. encourage to purchases seed ing matches other responses regarding the importance of organic breeding. For example, the vast majority of respondents believe that varieties bred for organic pro are duction to ofimportant success the overall organic agriculture, and that organic seed is important to the in through wholesale purchases. through wholesale purchases. One new question we asked in 2014 focused on motiva that see to happy We’re seed. organic purchasing for tions organic their want responding offarmers 80% than more reported gross revenue increases from organic certifed increases reported gross revenue seed over the last fve There years. are new companies report, last our since scale commercial a on participating grow large-scale with contracts under mostly they’re but ers; however, some smaller companies now sell larger quantities to farmers either through direct contract or A A number of factors contribute to farmers more sourcing organic seed. First, we know that more organic report was and that being sold because is seed available 1, Chapter in mentioned As suppliers. seed organic by ed the majority of seed suppliers responding to our survey Reasons organic seed more organic farmers are sourcing

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 34 How do conventional and organic seed prices compare?

According to an analysis of data provided by Pick A Carrot, the average price premium charged for organic seed was 65% above the conventional seed price. This is based on 473 varieties from 21 companies where a conventional and organic seed option was offered in the same units (e.g., both conventional and organic available for sale in 1000 seed units, or both conventional and organic available in one-quarter ounce units). Most prices were between 0 and 40% higher for organic seed, but the prices ranged from 40% cheaper to 340% more expensive. The companies listed by Pick A Carrot primarily sell vegetable seed, and therefore the varieties compared in this analysis are almost entirely vegetable varieties.

Although we do not have the same breadth of data for field crops, based on examples provided by field crop seed companies, the price premium is typically around 20-50%, with some examples where varieties cost about the same in conventional and organic seed and some examples where organic seed is more than twice as expensive.

Organic Premium

200

150

100

50 Number of items 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 400 Percent cost of organic seed item above equivalanent conventional item experiencing slightly fewer problems with organic seed need to encourage farmers who don’t demonstrate con- compared to fve years ago, especially with germination/ tinuous improvement in using organic seed to take ex- emergence, not being true to type, and weed contamina- tra measures to identify appropriate organic varieties, tion. We found no signifcant differences in quality issues whether that’s through variety trials on their farm or new between crop types. seed sources. Certifers have the important job of communicating the organic seed requirement, reinforcing the Organic certifers also play an important role in increased need for improvement when appropriate, and sharing re- sourcing of organic seed. Needless to say, it’s no one’s sources to support increased organic seed sourcing. intention to enforce the organic seed requirement at the expense of an organic farmer’s success. Farmers should In our farmer survey, we asked if certifers had request- not be forced to use an organic variety that may not be ed that greater steps be taken to source organic seed. We appropriate for their production system. Still, there’s a were surprised to see a marked decrease in the percent-

Figure 9. Over the last three years has your certifier requested that you take greater

Figure 9. Over the last three years has your certifier requested that you State of Organic Seed, 2016 steps to source organictake seed? greater steps to source organic seed?

2009 Yes 61% No 39%

35 2014 Yes 39.9% No 60.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% - - - -

Certifier requested more requested Certifier organic source to steps seed Certifier did not request did Certifier steps more

70%

60%

50% seed for larger operations Forage crop growers improved their haven’t use of organic seed Farmers report fewer certifer requests to improve organic seed sourcing 40%

dix B.1 for the list of for dix B.1 survey questions.) Half of survey. the our to responded companies Sixteen of revenue million seed $1 annual gross a had companies or higher (conventional and organic seed combined). Six of the companies had gross annual seed revenue of more than $2.5 million. Over the last fve years, gross revenue has increased for all companies responding (1- 20+%), with seven reporting increases of more than 20%. The majority of respondents reported that the percent of gross from certifedrevenue organic seed in ofinreportedout respondents 16 Ten 1-20+%. creased creases of 6-20+%. These numbers clearly demonstrate growth. sales in trend positive a • • How do we respond to the barriers farmers face when of availability the from – organicorganicseed sourcing in quantities insuffcient to traits desirable with varieties organic seed? To better understand the challenges to increasing the and quality, availability, integrity of organic seed from a production standpoint, we now turn to more results from our organic seed company survey. The purpose of this survey was to assess the challenges and oppor Appen (See sector. seed organic the growing in tunities 30%

- - - - 20%

10%

40% 55% 19% 27% 35% 33% 23% 36% 0%

Increased Organic Vegetable Seed Larger operations are still less likely to use organic seed organic use to likely less still are operations Larger organic using to barrier a remain requirements Buyer rieties bred for organic production are important to success ofthe overall organic agriculture sourcing of organic seed Farmers are more satisfed with the organic using they’re seed More farmers believe organic seed is important to va that and of production integrity food the organic More farmers report using 100% organic seed, espe seed, organic 100% farmersreportusing More cially feld crop growers Vegetable growers in particular report increased Increased Organic Field Crop Seed Crop Field Organic Increased Increased Organic Cover Crop Seed Crop Cover Organic Increased

Figure 10. Certifier requests compared to increased sourcing of organic seed Figure 10. Certifier requests compared to increased sourcing Increased Organic Forage Crop Seed Crop Forage Organic Increased to conventional seed. There are still areas where we improvements: seen haven’t • • Still, of the 126,000 farmersacres (or 43%) respondingof total to acreage ouris planted survey, • • We’ve identifed We’ve the following improvements over the based on our farmer years last fve survey: • • certifers requested farmers take greater steps to source greaterto farmerssteps certifers requested take organic seed, farmers responded by sourcing more or ganicseed (see Figure 10). have we made? What progress age of farmers reporting that certifers made these re of 40% Only 9). Figure (see quests farmers responding said their certifers made such a request whereas more than 60% reported this request in 2009. Furthermore we found, just as we did in our 2009 data, that when

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 36 These companies identifed the following economic, “enormous loopholes for proft-driven, large certifed production, and policy barriers to growing their organic organic operations [not using] organic seed.” seed business: One company shared that there is a “lack of certifer • Allowance of non-organic seed by the regulations knowledge about availability and seed supply processes,” and weak enforcement adding that many large-scale organic operations have to • Lack of reliable and experienced organic seed producers contract organic seed the year before or there will not be • Capital (infrastructure and marketing) enough quantity for particular varieties. This takes more effort and planning in the way of communicating and • Cost of organic seed production coordinating with seed production companies. • Seed production challenges (climate, pests, diseases, and scale) • Lack of education (consumers and producers) on The vast majority of farmers responding the benefts of organic seed to our survey agree that organic seed is important to the integrity of organic • Policies (GMOs, organic certifcation, and others) food production and that varieties bred for Below we expand on these challenges as described by organic production are important to the organic seed companies and note the progress we’ve overall success of organic agriculture made over the last fve years in addressing them. These challenges were also echoed at the eight lis- In short, seed companies would like to see more con- tening sessions held at organic farming conferences sistent enforcement of the rule and more education for in 2014 and 2015, which involves diverse stakeholder certifers and inspectors on organic seed availability and representation. We also conducted interviews with sourcing issues, especially when it comes to differences farmers who produce organic seed under commer- in scale and seed sourcing processes. The organic seed cial contracts. We conclude this chapter with a full requirement and its enforcement are discussed in more set of recommendations for expanding our nation’s detail in Chapter 3. organic seed production capacity. Lack of reliable and experienced Allowance of non-organic seed organic seed producers As discussed, the National Organic Program (NOP) al- As mentioned, producing high-quality seed under or- lows certifed operations to use untreated, conventional ganic conditions requires a special skill set. The lack seed when an equivalent organic variety is commer- of skilled organic seed producers remains a major cially unavailable. Several seed companies cited this as challenge to building the availability of organic seed. the number one reason for slow growth in the organic There’s a need to expand seed production knowledge seed industry. These companies believe that too many and capacity by crop type and region. There is also a organic growers are using conventional seed when need to greatly improve our national infrastructure for equivalent organic seed options are available. Some supporting these producers to ensure their success and of these companies believe that stronger enforcement long-term commitment to organic seed production – of the organic seed requirement is long overdue, es-

from providing high-quality stock seed to timely advice State of Organic Seed, 2016 pecially for larger operations where price and scale are for troubleshooting challenges in the feld. important factors. In one company’s words: “Organic growers [are] using conventional seed even when or- One company reported that it’s diffcult to “fnd experi- ganic seed is available in ample quality, quantity, and enced, reliable growers,” and another company relayed diversity, and certifers and the USDA-NOP continue that “the talented seed producers have limited organic to allow it. This is predominantly perpetuated by large- 37 production capacity.” Several companies identifed scale organic growers who will avoid organic seed due “seed grower training” as a major need. to price differentiation.” Another company pointed to ------the seed industry. In the words of one of these com in long-term to “invest need partnerships we to panies, grow organic seed production train areas, farmers, and co-invest in infrastructure to ensure larger production areas are growing with demand.” Also encouraging is that more organic farmers are in terested in producing organic seed for the commercial marketplace. According to our farmer survey, more use up an isolation on our small volume. We end up contracting out to very excited and passionate, but in to varyingexperienced, growers degrees of success.” Training new and existing mains a top priority for the organic Since community. organic host has (OSA) seed Alliance Seed Organicreport, 2011 our producers re ed more than 40 organic seed production workshops in addition to webinars and other trainings focused on on-farm variety trials and plant In breeding. the words one number “The ofrepresentative: company seed one reason hit we have the ground running [with a number trained were ofthey because is producers] seed organic by OSA.” Some organic seed farms and companies are also such teaching as workshops, Seven Seeds Farm in southern Oregon, Sierra Seeds in northern California, Club. Farm Breeding the and In the last fve years, some seed companies have taken on new staff charged with fnding and supporting new relationships strengthening while growers, organicseed with existing growers – an encouraging investment by Scale is an issue reported by several companies: match companies: several reportedby issue an is Scale grow for comfortable that’s scale the to needs their ing ers. For example, a company might not be able to sell need to grow to as use the their grower would as much equipment effciently, and in other cases the grow and grower can’t harvest as as much the company needs. In the latter case, the company has to place multiple smaller contracts – which can be more the expensive “As shared: on representative company One ends. both replacedget they out, phase growers experienced older, with younger growers who grow less seed and need a lot of mentoring.” One company says it actually needs more small-scale con “Our mentoring: for need the echoes but growers, tracts are smaller than most and because of this a lot of the more experienced, larger growers want don’t to ------Seed producers and suppliers and producers Seed * learn the basics of organic seed production. The curriculum includes seed production in tensives and a webinar series that addresses timely issues throughout the growing season. tening sessions. The goal of the program is to is program the of goal The sessions. tening provide beginning farmers with the necessary for seed organic grow to knowledge and skills the commercial marketplace. Working closely OSA companies, seed and producers seed with is developing a curriculum to help growers have long identified mentorship as a need, and need, a as mentorship identified long have lis our of number a at repeated was idea the for Sustainable Agriculture. It was USDA’s Beginning Farmer funded and Rancher Development in Program. In addition 2015to by beginning a farmers, the grant program targets Latino from farmers interested in theorganic seed production. * This program is a partnership between OSA and the MultinationalExchangethe and partnershipOSAbetween a isprogram This * In 2015, Organic Seed Alliance launched mentorship a program so growers that can learn inexperienced from experienced organic producers. seed New organic seed mentorship program launched report improved access to organic seed producers for spinach, chard, beets, and squash, but they say more are needed. growers growers and seed quality has generally been excellent. excellent. been generally has quality seed and growers Companies report fewer organic seed producers for peas and beans than there were fve years ago. These crops are increasingly diffcult to source, Companies variable. pests remains quality seed are and challenge, a Smith says that overall access to organic seed producers producers seed organic to access overall that says Smith the Over last years fve continues they to have improve. open- high-quality grow can who growers many as twice pollinated and hybrid sweet corn, brassicas, tomatoes, and these For peppers. crops they mostly enough have ure can often mean a variety is not as available organic seed in our catalog that year, which sometimes means there’s no organic seed for that variety in the market place at all.” And yet she believes the situation is improving. Lew- To illustrate the To current situation: One commercial or unavailable is variety a mean can failure crop seed ganic Lew-Smith Jodi Seed’s Organic Mowing High year. that con duplicate place to unfeasible it’s “As way: this it put tracts for every crop crop fail every one year, grower’s

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 38 than half of respondents are at least somewhat interested in producing organic seed commercially, and 90% of respondents are at least somewhat interested in taking organic seed production trainings. The top three factors keeping farmers from producing organic seed commercially include a lack of training, economic opportunities, and seed processing facilities.

Furthermore, 63% of respondents already produce organic seed for either on-farm use or commercial use. Seed producers identifed the following challenges related to expanding their organic seed production capacity. They report needing more: • Land in general and space for proper isolation • Yield and economic data by crop and region • Resources on production practices (weed, disease, and pest management) • Support to troubleshoot production challenges (access to experts) • Testing equipment and facilities (germination and GMO contamination) • Scale-appropriate and affordable equipment • Handling and storage facilities • Marketing assistance

Seed producers echoed the need for more training opportunities, but said the problem goes beyond a lack of training in production practices. Some seed producers say they’re set up to fail through poor stock seed, unfair contracts, and inconsistent communication from seed companies that don’t have the capacity to provide production support or communicate effectively about other questions, like payments.*

High-quality stock seed for open-pollinated varieties is critical. If off-types or undesirable variability exists in stock seed, either the seed producer is forced to spend time and lose yield by removing the unwanted plants, or State of Organic Seed, 2016 the ultimate user of the seed will receive a poor product. In interviews, some producers expressed frustration over receiving poor quality stock seed and being expected to “clean it up” with little guidance or compensation. Likewise, companies admit to not having good stock 39 seed programs in place. Good stock seed management

* One company representative speculates that poor stock seed and frustrations with contracts and prices may be one reason more farmers are going out on their own to start new organic seed companies or sell directly to other farmers. ------facility can also clean conventional seed). The require The seed). conventional clean also can facility ment for certifed organic serve handling may as a dis seed companies to diversify for conventional incentive into organic production. A big economic barrier for one feld crop seed com pany is that organic farmers they can make often know more money (and suffer fewer headaches) growing a requires extended weed control. Furthermore, lower yields can occur due to pest and disease impacts and the lack of plant protection chemicals in organic sys Intems. some cases certain diseases are a problem in seed production, but not in food production of the same crop. In many of these examples, plant breed ers have not focused on addressing diseases that im pact seed production since spray-on protections allowed,are often at higher rates, in production compared conventional to food production. seed Access to appropriately scaled equipment and storage facilities can also impact the cost of loss harvestingof and seed yield in post-harvest handling. Isolationgenetically testingforand engineeredat-riskcontent in crops also contributes to increased production costs. Companies also report challenges associated with cash fow and managing inventory, paperwork, employees, and organic certifcation. Finally, organic certifcation requires that seed cleaning activities be conducted ei ther on a certifed organic farm or in cleaning a facility professional that is certifed organic (though the More than one company mentioned marketing costs as costs marketing mentioned company one More than a big challenge to growing their business. These costs add up in the way of trations, and advertising, being away from conference the farm. regis In the words of one company: “Talking to other similar-sized seed of minimum a road the on are they companies, days 80 a year verypromoting It’s themselves. hard to be away from the farm that much for us, and to pay for all the But conference, and this fair expo, company fees.” and others recognize the need to get “more exposure to a group of more diverse wider, customers.” Cost of organic seed productionOrganic seed is sometimes more costly to produce conventionalnumberthanofa forseed reasons.Weed management is often a high expense in organic pro duction and seed crops are a long season crop that ------property restrictions are associated with the varieties Farmers and other seed stakeholders organic say the in they transparency more want marketplace intellectual — any whether information and grown about was seed where panies say they panies need say more capital to train regional seed growers, invest in sales and marketing, and generally build scalable systems that support their growth. In frastructure challenges also include access to land for growing organic seed and space for isolation. Capital Capital In addition to a lack of access to skilled organic seed producers, companies report a lack of build their resources infrastructure in to a number of ways. Com These companies not only aim to fll gaps in the organic organic the in gaps fll to aim only not companies These adapted better are that varieties provide but supply seed to specifc environments and regions. These companies farmers more engaging to commitment a emphasize also in their work and, in so farmers doing, empowering to system. seed regional own their in participate regionally adapted varieties for their state and northern latitudes. other small ofother number a complement cooperatives These seed companies that are new within the last ten years. particular regions. The frst organic seed cooperative, incorporated was Farmer Seed Cooperative, the Family in 2008 and now includes 16 organic seed farms rep resenting seven states. In 2015, the Triple Divide Or ganic Seeds Cooperative, based in Montana, offcially launched with the mission of developing and selling One way One producers way are addressing some of these chal lenges is by developing cooperatives coopera seed couple a are There equipment. and to costs, share risks, tives in the US that are focused on addressing organic to varieties adapted gapsproviding and availability seed seed seed production on a more infrequent basis. However, the as limited noted number ofabove, skilled seed pro it makes isolations available limited with coupled ducers challenging for companies to have separate production seed. production and seed for stock protocols protocols typically separate seed stock growing from production seed growing, and typically schedule stock

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 40 cash crop rather than seed. For example, most organic provenance very cheaply.” wheat growers, if approached, would probably not produce organic winter triticale seed and face low yields Competition is a healthy characteristic of a seed sys- and a high likelihood of winterkill when they could pro- tem, and more players have entered the organic seed duce organic winter wheat for the market. In this con- sector. But we heard repeatedly at our listening ses- text, the only way a company can get growers to com- sions that farmers and other stakeholders want more mit to organic seed production is to guarantee payment transparency in the organic seed marketplace – infor- at the organic winter wheat level, which then makes the mation about where the seed was grown, by whom, triticale seed prohibitively expensive. and whether any intellectual property restrictions are associated with the varieties. Companies reported challenges associated with cost, including “small lots are expensive to produce” and Seed production challenges the “lopsided business structure of seed sales” (all expenses up front to cover the course of the year). An- As mentioned, organic seed production requires dif- other company pointed to the importance of paying ferent approaches to pest, weed, and disease challenges employees fair wages, which also impacts production given the lack of spray-on solutions and seed treatments available to organic growers. Unfortunately, or- costs and capacity. ganic seed production research is not keeping pace with In addition to the expenses associated with organic evolving pest and disease pressures; however, we see seed production, one company referenced the “ceil- progress in the form of 20 funded organic seed pro- ing amount we can charge for seeds due to competi- duction research projects over the last fve years. There tion.” This competition comes in a variety of forms were only 12 identifed between 1996 and 2009. starting with the lower price of conventional seed. Some examples include a project focused on seed dis- More than one company pointed to the regulatory al- eases in the Northeast (funded by the USDA’s Sustain- lowance of conventional seed, noting the “higher cost able Agriculture Research and Education program); of organic seed production [while] at the same time a manual on organic cover crop seed production for [having] to compete with cheaper conventional seed.” Southeastern growers, including economic analyses by Competition also includes larger seed companies with crop (funded by Organic Farming Research Founda- international production that may be able to produce tion); an organic seed production manual focused on at a lower cost, potentially driving down prices. Ad- climatic considerations (funded by the USDA’s Risk ditionally, one company pointed to “lots of start-up Management Agency); and a graduate fellow at Wash- Internet businesses selling ‘heirloom seed’ of dubious ington State University studying organic seed pathology State of Organic Seed, 2016

41 ------Another company mentions state policies as they relate they as policies state mentions company Another to crop disease outbreaks. Organic seed producers say these policies work for often them. don’t example, For Northwest, Pacifc the in disease ofleg case black the in the policies in place to test and treat seed are designed for large conventional seed companies. “Some can ar leg is here because “that black this company says, gue,” hinder growth in organic seed sales ifsales expect seed organiccustomers in growth hinder more uniformity. Policies Policy is an important componentexpanding organic seed systems, ofas discussed in Chap our roadmap for ter 3. Through our seed company survey we identifed the in growth inhibiting to relate they as concerns policy industry. Regulatory enforcement of the organic seed requirement has been include mentioned, issues and policy Other will chapter. be next the further in discussed GMOs. and certifcation, organic regulations, seed state One company notes its biggest challenge to increasing sales is complying with individual state regulations, ap sell worth if decide it’s to trying and fees, and plications, said be it company Another would ing in certain states. all by requirements labeling seed “common have to nice states for all While retail all seed companies suppliers.” face this web of regulations, resources and education organichelpcould companieseasilynavigatemoreseed them as they grow and expand nationally. We also have to work as an organic to work to seed community also have We better understand how the seed systems we’re devel oping work both at a domestic and international scale. Some companies cite a “misunderstanding vari by seed how about system organicseed the in players many protect and distributed, produced, developed, are eties grown seed “misinformation”that is there that and ed” of supportive not a or wrong ethically is US the outside resilient seed system. Finally, some companies are concerned that the value ofcom Several dismissed. often too is organichybrids panies also relay serious concerns about the diffculty in of) (and maintenance lack of open-pollinated variet In a similar while ies. geneticvein, can variation be cel ebrated and useful, too much genetic variation within to potential the has marketplace the in organicvarieties ------seed quality or are worried about the cost, preferring to buy cheaper seed. Brand allegiance and variety al concerna ofas context raised the also in were legiance expanding organic seed sales. $3.50.” In the words of another company, there is a lack lack a is there ofcompany, words another the In $3.50.” of “awareness of [the] benefts of not just regional But it’s ganic seed, and a small seed company.” seed, or said company One educated. be to need who gardeners at operating those especially farmers, organic some that a larger scale, are “somewhat dubious” about organic seed is important, but it was communicated this time as as time this communicated was it but important, is seed much more urgent. As one company noted, “consumers don’t know the difference between a $0.99 seed packet and one that is gardeners, and consumers about the benefts of organic of organic benefts the about consumers and gardeners, growers and why what goesseed, into its development, stood This tag. price higher the pay to willing be should ofdata out new coming recommendation major a as out collected through surveys and listening sessions. We’ve long heard that education on the benefts of organic Lack of education lis attending stakeholders other and – companies Many tening sessions – point to a need to educate farmers, panies note the challenge in fnding proper isolation for isolation proper fnding in challenge the note panies growing particular crops on a larger scale – isolation to protect the integrity of a specifc variety or to avoid GMO contamination. Companies report an ongoing lack of access to untreated parent hybrid lines for pro ducing organic seed corn, as discussed in Chapter 3. seed, which is in line with our farmer survey fndings where no progress is seen in the sourcing of organic forage seed. Com research. with answered be can’t challenges Other producers and companies address production lenges. Seed companies chal report general research needs associated with pest, disease, and weed control, in ad reportalso Companies spe instability. climate to dition cifc challenges. One company diffcult says it’s to fnd a consistent supply of organic pasture and hay grass (funded by Clif Bar Family Foundation). (See Appendix Appendix (See Foundation). Clif Family by Bar (funded oflist pertainingfull projects a for research A.2 funded to organic production.) seed Ongoing investments are needed to help organic seed

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 42 of these conventional systems and yet it’s smaller or- seed supply more robust.” ganic growers that are unable to afford the legally required test or treatment.” In 2011, OSA conducted a survey of organic seed companies focused on risks and costs associated with GMO Organic certifcation can be a challenge for some seed contamination. We were especially interested in chal- businesses. The USDA’s Organic Cost Share Program lenges for organic seed corn companies, given how eas- helps alleviate costs for operations, but one company ily corn cross-pollinates. Some of the seed companies says it’s more than cost: responding to this survey reported an inability to access a good diversity of high-quality germplasm for organic As seed growers we fnd that the certifcation hybrid seed corn production. process is not understanding of our different needs. The processors certifcate and handlers As will be discussed in the next chapter, many of the certifcate (we need both) are designed more best inbred corn lines are only accessible through oner- for produce and not our systems. We need ous licensing agreements with the largest chemical and more organic seed companies and maybe the biotechnology companies. At times the licensing agree- fact that certifcation doesn’t seem to have ments also restrict testing for patented GE traits. These seed companies in mind in the frst place is companies don’t have an interest in serving the organic one of the hurdles. sector, as evidenced by their decision to make relatively few untreated inbred lines available. Addressing the Lastly, GMOs were reported by a number of com- barriers to accessing appropriate lines for organic seed panies as inhibiting their operations. The burden was production is critical to increasing organic corn and described in the context of having to pay for testing seed offerings. and challenges with fnding appropriate isolation to avoid contamination by unwanted GE material. One Summary US-based company is trying to produce its organic alfalfa seed varieties in Europe to avoid contamination The organic seed supply isn’t keeping up with rapid but has faced enormous hurdles given restrictions on growth in the organic food industry. Most organic imports, even when extensive testing shows the seed farmers still rely on conventionally produced seed for at being shipped has no GE content. This company also least part of their operation. Through a national survey noted “confusion about the allowable levels [of GE of certifed organic crop farmers, a survey of organic content] in organic seed and food” and that we need seed companies, listening sessions, and interviews with to “increase access [to] and test non-GMO corn and organic seed producers, we’ve identifed the following soybean lines across the nation to make the organic recommendations for expanding organic seed systems State of Organic Seed, 2016

43 ------Whole Farm Revenue Protec Organic seed producers struggle to keep keep to struggle producers seed Organic organic seed treatments that enhance germination and reduce risk of disease. There’s a need to identify gaps in organic seed production through research a survey of seed producers and and suppliers, and resources use these fndings manu to research projects, develop andals, other training tools that fll these gaps. seven crops). Organic seed producers should consider participating in this program to guard against losses, shouldcontinue expanding USDA numbertheandthe of organic commodities covered. Furthermore, seed producers should be paid a price that’s With with other organic premiums. competitive crops that receive ofproduc seed volume and out companies seed sales, ers can’t invest in effciencies to lower costs, and seed increase prices they companiesto pay seedcan’t farm ers. This threatens to further reduce the capacity of organic production. seed Invest in organic seed production research education and up with evolving disease and pest pressures. More re search is needed on solutions to these and other pro produc on needed also is Research challenges. duction tion practices by region, such as crop spacing, timing of also need more seed pro We planting, and fertility. productiontosuited best varieties fnd toductiontrials in a region based on vernalization, day-length, tem peratures, and more. More research is also needed on nies. nies. These risks include managing seed crops without chemical controls, GMO contamination, and prices contract compounds poorly This seed. stock maintained that are at times marginally proftable and can lead to growers leaving the organic seed production business. payment other explore might industry seed organic The models, such as paying by acre versus pound of seed mini secure a offering or crops, high-risk for produced mum in the event of crop failure or low yield – there of and reward fore sharing the risk production. Protect producers from the economic risks inher production seed to ent for farmers rewards that program new relatively a is tion being diversifed and insures crops at the full organic price without any cap amount. The diversifcation in to (up crop each for premium farmer’s a lowers centive ------Organic seed producers need Organic seed producers need yield Organic seed producers Seed production contracts often Many organic seed producers are challenged by a by challenged are producers seed organic Many Develop Develop contracts that share the risks of organic seed production place risks in production on premium seed payment or farmers assurances without from seed compa ening these networks will support the success of rent organic seed producers and help new growers enter cur the market. Already these networks are helping growers – and suppliers seed with and connect equipment share well. as ways other in them supporting lack lack of access to appropriate seed harvesting and clean They ing also equipment. report more needing support are growingwith handling and storage. on Networks the Internet and through NGOs in interested coordinating seed growers at a regional and national level. Strength eases, weeds, and eases, weeds, Seed pests. companies could be more data sales and volume productionsharing in transparent to encourage new producers to enter the market. Create regional and national seed producer net works and and economic data by crop type and region. This is an The ongoing gap resources. in organic seed production organic seed community could begin by an developing organic seed crop yield database. Organic seed produc dis manage to best how on resources more need also ers needed, as is support for conventional seed producers to transition to organic. Develop region-specifc resources on production data and practices tions, tions, and appropriate seed crops vary. There’s a need to train organic seed producers in a variety of and crops at different scales, and in hybrid seed production as well. University programs could develop curriculum on organic seed production as part of their education offerings. More grower-to-grower mentoring is also Recommendations Train more organic seed producers and support existing producers more training opportunities and educational resources, ideally by region, since climates, environmental condi at the production level. In particular, there are a number number a are there particular, In level. production the at of recommendations for growing the base of skilled organic seed producers and supporting the success of existing producers.

Chapter 2: State of Organic Seed Supply 44 More than 60% of farmers responding to our survey already produce organic seed for either on-farm use or commercial sale

Develop quality assurance programs Organic seed industry is necessary to create a useful list of organic producers need access and resources to support test- seed available in the marketplace. There’s a need to bet- ing, from germination to GE content. Some seed ter understand barriers to, and incentives for, seed com- companies and cooperatives need information and pany participation to ensure that a robust resource is advisory support to develop internal quality assurance available to organic farmers, organic seed companies, programs. There’s also a need to explore possible third and organic certifers. party quality assurance models that could serve the organic seed industry, such as those offered by some Develop a public education campaign to promote state crop improvement associations. organic seed Organic seed offers broad public beneft, including minimizing environmental impacts, sup- Develop and improve organic stock seed programs porting the success of the organic food industry, and Seed producers rely on high-quality stock seed when bolstering regional food diversity and security. The growing a commercial seed crop. Seed companies could success of the organic seed industry requires market beneft from additional training on stock seed produc- support. Public education campaigns are needed to tion, including: (1) setting up a stock seed production build this broad base of support and fnancial invest- schedule; (2) creating clear ideals and selection protocols ment through market choices. By showing the benefts for each variety; (3) identifying growers with the skill of organic seed, a public education campaign can build set, scale, and appropriate environment for stock seed broader stakeholder support for organic seed and for production, and paying them appropriately for occa- the actions recommended in this report. sional stock seed grow-outs; and (4) creating long-term stock seed storage facilities to reduce the frequency of Work with organic food processors that contract grow-outs. Organic seed producers also need training particular varieties One hurdle to larger scale farmers in stock seed production. Educating and working with sourcing organic seed is that production contracts dic- state foundation seed programs might be one way to tate what variety they grow, and too often the variety is expand and improve organic stock seed programs. not available in an organic form or in the quantity they need. There’s a need for more communication to co- Assist new and existing enterprises with marketing ordinate organic seed production contracts in time for constraints A central database that provides a compre- planting. Buyers that require specifc varieties be grown hensive list of the organic seed available is still needed. under contract should work with their contracted op- Since our last report, two websites have been devel- erations to communicate variety and volume needs to oped to serve this need: Organic Seed Finder and Pick organic seed companies. This effort must be coupled A Carrot. These platforms help us understand supply with stronger enforcement of the organic seed require- and demand, but full participation by the organic seed ment to encourage this kind of relationship building. State of Organic Seed, 2016

45 ------

3 Chapter olicy work is essential to building and protecting and regulations impact Laws organic seed systems. Inconsistent enforcement ofreg seed enforcement organic Inconsistent the ulatory requirement GE crops Contamination by Increased consolidation in the seed industry The privatization of seed and impacts on organic seed innovation Insufficient public investments breeding plant in organic

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. each each part of these systems — from how much public funding is directed toward organic plant breeding to policies that aim to keep genetically engineered (GE) traits out of that, as an or imperative organic It’s seed. ganic seed community, we engage in advocacy to ad shared policy priorities. vance Broadly speaking, advocacy efforts ofseed integrityorganic and should development the to threats confront while educating the public – consumers, farmers, and decision makers – about the benefts of organic seed As systems. already discussed, beyond helping farmers meet a regulatory requirement to use organic seed, the benefts of expanding organic seed systems are poten a healthier people and planet. tially far-reaching: This chapter discusses priorities advocacy fve for sup porting the development and long-term success of or ganic seed Thesesystems. priorities include addressing challenges: the following P State of Organic State of Seed Policy

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 46 h proe f te urn ognc ed exemption seed organic current the of purpose The available.” commercially not is variety produced organically equivalent an when croporganic produce plantinganto usedstock may be and seedsuntreated produced,“nonorganically stating: conventional seed, untreated, use to farmers allows that launched, the regulations provide a necessary exemption NOP the inadequatewhenwas seed organic of supply ai poues ae ae aeut ses o source to steps adequate taken have producers ganic or whether determining when leeway of lot a for low al guidance and regulations current the Furthermore, seed availability organic on up by region. type and crop to seed, it’s diffcult for certifers and inspectors to keep relates compliance NOP’sthis the regulations.As with compliance verify to is certifers organic of role The The exemption is also challenging for organic certifers. growers.option fororganic an still is produce) to costly less is (which seed organic non- when offerings seed organic their of volume the risky.increase as diversifytion and to They’re reluctant investments in organic plant breeding and seed produc increased view companies some industry, seed the In en a challenge to growing the organic seed marketplace. prov also exemptionhas systems,the their yet for mal to seed that mayto use organic not be opti force farmers intention one’s no it’s mentioned, As operations. their for seed organic appropriate to access lack who growers for important is seed non-organic lowancefor ing 100% seed organic usage when appropriate. The al catch up eventuallyto demand, achievwith the goal of to industry seed the for time transition a provide to is * Buyersincludewholesalers, processors,andotherfoodcompanies thatenterintoproductioncontractswith farmers. integrity along the entire production chain. organic ensureseedlings,annual stock”toplanting and statethatproducers “must useorganically seeds,grown regulations (NOP) Program’s Organic National The the of organic seedregulatoryrequirement enforcement Inconsistent for thenextfve years. agenda policy seed organic an as serve to mendations ance, and education, and conclude with updated recom guid reform, policy through addressed be to need that problems the describing by priorities Wethese explore 14 Because the ------and again in2008. and again 2005 in requirement seed the on guidance for dations recommen detailed NOP the provided committee the efforts, their of result a As concerns. these address to Board (NOSB) responded by creating a joint committee mented, and enforced. The National Organic Standards how the seed requirement would imple be interpreted, about concerns variousrelayed members industry seed and producers organic launched, was NOP the After seedrequirement. the organic organic seed. This leads to inconsistent enforcement of tion.” Annual Seeds, “Guidance Seedlings, and Planting Crop StockProduc in Organic 2013: 4, March on ment eventuallyNOP docu guidance fnal its published The • • • • • • • thefnalguidancedoesn’t:In short, the of NOSB’s recommendationswere Many notincluded. process. comment public the through supported strongly and suggested were that areas cal but disappointed by its contents, fnding it left out criti released guidance the see to happy were Alliance, Seed

eurmn t ue rai se, the seed, organic benefits of expanding use organic seed systems to requirement regulatory a meet farmers helping Beyond r ptnily a-ecig a healthier a people andplanet far-reaching: potentially are ing of organic seed organic ing of sourc increased supporting in role NOP’s Explain cifc varieties be grown spe require that buyers on responsibility any Place seeddatabase anationalorganic Require theuseof noncompliance Clarify theissueof Plan goal Systems Organic an as usage seed organic Establish source theirseed various sizes how producers Address of the issue of for measures seed sourcing organic extra take to producers Encourage 15 Many organic stakeholders, including Organic Organic including stakeholders, organic Many *

------

47 State of Organic Seed, 2016 ------tifer shared, “There seems to be more seed available over the past fve years.” Another remarked, “Many more farmers seem to trust that it is now high-quality seed and are purchasing organic seed with greater will It seems ingness. quite often that organic seed supplies run demand.” market indicating out as well, Despite these perceived improvements in market ac ceptance, only 22% of certifers reported that organ ic growers are making a greater effort to fnd organic seed. Nearly half of certifers most that indicating 31% with question, on this neutral responding remained growers aren’t making a greater effort to fnd organic cies (ACAs) based in the US. In 2015, we distributed a survey to the US-based ACAs to better understand how the organic seed requirement is being enforced, challenges agencies face in ofAp enforcement, (see way resources the and in education needed and what’s pendix C for the survey questions). Each question in cluded a comments section to capture additional feed back. Most major respondedACAs to our survey – 22 respondents representing nearly 70% of certifed op erations in the US. First we asked for certifers’ observations market acceptance of regarding organic seed. The vast majority agreed strongly or agreed (86%) ofresponding certifers that organic seed is gaining acceptance in the market (see Figure 11). Certifers explained in comments that they see progress in availability and One sourcing. cer ------Neutral Strongly agree or agree ercent of certifiers who agree that organic seed is gaining market acceptance that agree ercent of certifiers who p Figure 11. duction chain – beginning with organic with – beginning chain seed. duction the certifier perspective Getting organic certify to agents 80 accredited has USDA The with operations, 48 of these accredited certifed agen pages 50-51). We believe producers who aren’t meeting who producers aren’t believe pages We 50-51). the organic seed requirement should be encouraged by certifers to demonstrate improvement each year. This is also an issue of consumer confdence, since organic pro entire organicthe integrityalongexpect consumers Our Our main critique of the guidance can be couched as a failure to provide a framework for what continuous improvement – a concept embedded in organic certi fcation – looks like and how to achieve it in the con text of seed (see full critique and recommendations on progress we’ve made in the organic seed sector since the regulations were written. For example, the number of companies supplying organic seed has grown ten- fold and more educational resources and tools exist to support the sourcing and planting of organic seed. ic varieties for a particular crop doesn’t mean those vari those mean doesn’t crop particular a for varieties ic eties are adequate for meeting the needs of all farmers. Still, while the organic community is in general agree ment that the organic seed supply hasn’t caught up to ofdemands regional and diverse the meet organic pro the refect doesn’t currentguidance NOP’s the duction, Organic seed availability issues are complex, to be sure. sure. be to complex, are issues Organicavailability seed of number a organ to access farmershave because Just Figure 11. Organic seed is gaining acceptance in the market. Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 48 don’t use organic seed. Their answers were in line with line inanswerswere Their seed.don’t organic use certify they operations reasons common most the on perceivedimprovement. Certiferswere askedreport to no indicating same, the stayed or increased has (82%) non-organic of vegetable seed (77%) and feld crop seed tables and feld crops. The majority reported that the use sourcing is improving more generally, focusing on vege seed organic whetherestimate to ACAsasked We also less diversifed operationsdon’t. whereas sources three beyond go typically vegetables, in especially operations, diversifed more that gested sug Comments sources. three consulting beyond seed - - veying seed companies to understand the supply side side supply the understand to companies seed veying sur including availability, commercial track better to seed (see organic Figure 12). Their comments provide ideas for how of availability commercial the evaluate to clients their from data suffcient collect to feasible it’s believe responding certifers of (54%) half About organically. available high, and processor (buyer) demands varieties that aren’t desirabletraits,genetictoowas price of lacka seed, of insuffcientwasquantitythere form, organic certifed a varietywasn’t specifc the being fve reasons available in top the with 2, Chapter in fndings survey farmer our -

49 State of Organic Seed, 2016

- - There is lan goal. p The guidance is silent on the topic of The NOP has endorsed a new organic seed database, seed organic new a endorsed has NOP The The guidance should be amended to call on certifiers to encourage producers who don’t We recommend the NOP provide examples of noncompliance through certifier trainings. We recommend the NOP provide examples of noncompliance through The NOP should proactively work to encourage organic seed companies to participate in The guidance should be amended to encourage certifiers to work with producers to gauge to producers with work to certifiers encourage to amended be should guidance The and when there is adequate diversity and volume to require the use of organic seed for particular crop types. crop particular for seed organic of use the require to volume and diversity adequate is there when and This could possibly be conducted in partnership with organizations hosting these online resources and public and non-profit research institutes conducting organic variety trials. Recommendation: Organic Seed Finder and other online resources. Referencing these tools would bring them to the attention of certifiers and producers, and encourage further engagement and investment. We also recommend that the NOSB and NOP work together on a process for reviewing organic seed availability each year to determine if Recommendation: tools. online reference should guidance final The 4. Organic Seed Finder, as a resource for national organic seed availability data, and other resources exist as well, such as Pick a Carrot and SeedWise. 3. The final guidance should clarify the issue of noncompliance. organic source to failure the does When issue. the on support and clarity more need Certifiers noncompliance. on based revocation or suspension pursue to needed is evidence What noncompliance? major a become seed issu where situations or examples with provided are certifiers that important It’s seed? non-organic of use the ing non-compliances is appropriate. by percentage used or acreage planted. While we’re glad the guidance states that certifiers should review an the years, previous to information source current comparing by seed organic obtaining in progress operation’s that this is an important OSP goal. document lacks strong language indicating Recommendation: increases in organic seed usage. measurable and reasonable annual ing more than three seed sources and/or conducting on-farm variety trials. Certifiers should also encourage the production of organic seed for preferred varieties in advance. large-scale producers to contract 2. The final guidance should establish organic seed usage as an Organic Systems measurable and reasonable for goals (OSP) Systems Plan Organic specific identifying in guidance no currently increases in organic seed usage, including plans for transitioning to organic varieties and reviewing increases when larger growers likely have to contract organic seed production a year in advance. This will take extra effort on the part of certifiers and producers, but the long-term impact on the amount of acreage planted to organic seed will be enormous. Recommendation: consult of form the in research additional do to seed of context the in improvement continuous demonstrate additional steps to source organic seed – beyond consulting three sources – the result is increased organic seed usage. Producers who do not demonstrate continuous improvement in their organic seed procurement year-to-year should be encouraged to conduct additional research. This research should certifiers Furthermore, farms. their on trials should variety organic conducting and/or sources three than include more consulting consider, as part of their verifications, how producers of various scales long-term allowed be not should source supply insufficient of evidence as seed. catalogs three list to operations For large-scale example, allowing The NOP plays an important role in impacting the success of the organic strengthen seed can sector, NOP and thus the the ways organic six are Below trainings. certifier and guidance policy through whole, a as industry Production.” Crop Organic in Stock Planting and Seedlings, Annual Seeds, “Guidance document: 2013 March its 1. The final guidance should encourage producers to take extra measures for sourcing take organic seed. to producers organic encourage certifiers when that suggests survey farmer our 2, Chapter in described As Six Steps to Stronger Seed Guidance Seed to Stronger Steps Six

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 50 weren’t able to source organic seed (another 31% say it’s they claimed clients their when varieties equivalent ate evalu to feasible isn’t it said (36%) responding ACAs of producers.one-third to than on passed More cation certif of cost the on impact potential the and mation time required to trackinclude the this infor amount of availability commercial evaluating to constraints Major (55%). and Pick aCarrot (77%), listing seed NCAT/ATTRA organic sponding), re SeedFinder(96% Organic seed-sourcingtools: ing research.” Right now recommendcertifers the follow able, seed under and varieties that organic are currently avail commercially typically not are that seed organic ganicseedthat are typically readily available, or types of of types as such updates, and education provides seed if newsletterthat providedsuppliersquarterly regional, a helpful be would “It says: ACA One better. the OrganicTradeAssociationinitsAugust12,2011,commentsondraftguidance: Recommendation: sourcing organicseed. in farmers guiding in them assist that information and trainings with inspectors and certifiers provide should certifying agents but not the NOP, including efforts to ensure the guidance is effectively implemented. The NOP 6. The final guidance shouldn’t explain the NO be grown(orthatsourceseeddirectly)forcontractualgrowingpurposes. Recommendation: growers, dictatewhetherorganicornon-organicseedispurchasedandplanted. not contracts, these since OSP, their in and inspections handlers’ during raised be seed about questions that require should NOP The form. organic certified a in available not are varieties these often too but varieties, certain grow to producers with contract handlers Many requirement. seed the to subject not are purposes ing lished in conjunction with the final guidance, the NOP writes that handlers purchasing buyers. of seed responsibility the skirts for guidance final contractual The 5. grow and plantingstock. to intended do lead and to growers handlers usage of not procedures seed greater follow organic when to be used as a tool non-compliances to regard ACAs encourage will NOP accreditation of ACAs. reviews NOP’s of part be will usage stock planting or seed organic of ACAs by Monitoring decisions. purchase stock seed/planting make that operations handling including usage, increased to emphasize will It (ACAs). ACAs Agents that they Certifying should monitor their Accredited clients’ for use of organic programs seed and training planting stock during for evidence stock of ing The National Organic Program (NOP) will continue to address the use of organic seeds and plant The final guidance should be amended to include a pledge from the NOP as referenced by The final guidance should be amended to apply to handlers who require specific varieties specific require who handlers to apply to amended be should guidance final The

p ’s role. ------materials and outreach for organic farmers, such as as or increasewould data, trial variety such organic to access farmers, organic for outreach and materials educational additional that agree (82%) respondents of majority vast perspective.The farmer a from sues is seed understand inspectors and certifers help to needed are trainings additional that agree respon (55%) dents of half than more sentiment, this Echoing past experienceswithvarieties tomarket preference. to climate from decisions, seed into play factors many availability providedinformation by operations since so commercial contradict to expertise the have don’t ers certif that out point comments Several form.” ganic availablenot consistently are or that in crops awareof be impossible. Another one noted that ACAs “are likely wouldn’tit information, of kind this track to functions that, while it would require additional time and database feasible and 27% remained neutral). One notes certifer The guidance describes the role of producers and In the “Response to Comments” document pub document Comments” to “Response the In 16

------

51 State of Organic Seed, 2016 ------istics of the buyer which selected, the variety, variety. another to equivalent found be cannot All they know is that they have to grow the crop organic for the buyer. Many growers are contracted to produce very produce to contracted are growers Many specifc crop varieties organically and do not have the choice to fnd an equivalent variety. It puts the ACA in the diffcult position of character the that justify to grower the telling As discussed, ACAs play an important role in supporting supporting in role important an play ACAs discussed, As the expansion of organic seed systems by communicat operations to certifed requirement ing seed the organic and enforcing the rule in a reasonable and measurable Consistentway. enforcement will require more data col and lection, resources, education to help certifed opera Some certifers are going shared even that it further. audits all One operations annually ACA to deter mine what percent of total varieties used are organic, and then it looks for this percentage to increase each year. Others say they’ve made improvements, such as mailing lists of seed suppliers to the operations certify, they but that they changed haven’t internal policies. Several comments point to limitations in enforcement: “In situations where the producer uses proprietary va rieties, there must be a process for developing organic says: Another ACA varieties.” Strongly disagree or disagree Strongly agree or agree Neutral ------s it feasible for Accredited Certifying Agents (ACAs) to collect sufficient i

Figure 12. evaluate the commercial availability of organic seed? data from their clients to website(14%), conduct trials of available organic variet (9%), catalogs seed three than more research ies (14%), (5%). production seed organic contract and options options for categorizing these improvements. The ma jority of respondents (68%) strengthened haven’t their regarding procedures organicand The polices seed. bal in seed request to operations encouraging reported ance a timely matter (23%), search the Organic Seed Finder when seed can be categorized as commercially unavail they are neutral or not sure. say while nearly 40% able, We asked if ACAsand procedures as they relate to organichad seed (see Fig follow-up provided strengthened we yes, answering those For 14). ure their own polices regulations before the organic seed market is suffcient to meet the current and growing demand for organic seed. When asked about the NOP’s March 2013 or ganic seed guidance document, more than half (55%) determine to ACAs for easier it makes guidance the said more data would help adoption. We asked if stronger regulations were needed at this time. More than one-third (36%) of respondents said no, while more than 40% responded as neutral or not sure. Certifers relayed wariness about strengthening ganic seed sourcing (see Figure 13). Comments point point Comments 13). Figure (see sourcing seed ganic to the need for more research on organic seed, saying data from their clients to evaluate the commercial availability of organic seed data from their clients to evaluate Chapter Certifying Agents (ACAs) to collect sufficient Figure 14: It is feasible for Accredited 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 52 over thelastthreeyears? Figure 16.Haveyoustrengthenedyourpoliciesandproceduresregardingorganicseed access toorganicvarietytrialdata,wouldincreaseusageofseed Figure 15:Additionaleducationalmaterialsandoutreachfororganicfarmers,suchas Yes No iue 4 Hv yu teghnd or oiis n poeue rgrig organic regarding procedures seed overthelastthreeyears? and policies your strengthened you Have 14. Figure access toorganicvarietytrialdata,wouldincreaseusageofseed Figure 13. Additional educational materials and outreach for organic farmers, such as organic seedusagewhen appropriate the seedindustrytocatch uptodemand,withthegoalofeventually achieving100% The purposeofthecurrent organicseedexemptionistoprovide atransitiontimefor over thelastthreeyears? Figure 16.Haveyoustrengthenedyourpoliciesandproceduresregardingorganicseed Yes No Strongly disagreeor Neutral Strongly agreeor

53 State of Organic Seed, 2016 - - - - - This fgure is 77 times that 18 prevention measures on the part of owners of part the on measuresprevention and users of GE crops, mandatory GMO labeling, post-market monitoring, and mechanism a for harmed by contamination compensating growers The US’s regulating biotechnology has patchwork mandatory leftofabsence includingtheholes, many approach to These losses – in the form of rejected semi-loads or years of on-farm plant breeding work – aren’t always documented or made public, but they can have seri ous impacts on producers and the suppliers they serve. num a needed, is data economic Whilecomprehensive ber of surveys are helping us understand the impacts to farmers. For example, as part of 2012 the USDA’s census of agriculture, organic farmers reported expe riencing total monetary losses between 2011 and 2014 approximately $66,395 averaging per farmer, and more than $6.1 million in all. industry seed free of GE traits. All of the companies test some if not all of their organic and non-GE seed ofcom presence some the for products For traits. GE panies, testing is expensive, costing tens of thousands of year. dollars each We’re beginning to better understand the problem at the at problem the understand better to beginning We’re seed level. Our farmer survey, described in Chapter 2, com seed want farmers(78%) organic most that found panies to test and report rates of GE contamination (See Figure 15). Most farmers responding (71%) also believe that federal regulations that oversee GE crop approvals aren’t adequate for protecting their organic farm contamination (see Figure 16). from potential In 2011, OSA surveyed companies that supply organic and non-GE seed to document the burdens associated with avoiding, identifying, and dealing with unwanted GE material in their seed lines. that the Our majority of fndings seed show companies surveyed believe “very it’s important” for seed companies to supply the reported 2011 time frame. during the 2006 and ------

* Alfalfa, canola, papaya, sweet corn, and yel 17 * Other GE crops have been approved over the last ten years, such as a plums, apples, rice, and potatoes – but just because certain crops have received approval doesn’t mean they’re mean doesn’t approval received have crops certain because just but – potatoes and rice, apples, plums, a as such years, ten last the over approved been have crops GE Other * in commercial production. dlers. dlers. In fact, no other segment of agriculture works harder to provide a non-GMO product, since organic are producers to required as take such precautions part of their Organic Systems Plan. And when prevention measures fail, organic producers also shoulder costs as contamination. with sociated GE material continues to end up in organic seed, crops, crops, seed, organic in up end to continues material GE and are measures food when even products prevention in place. The onus of avoiding the problem solely remains on the shoulders of organic producers and han GE GE crops are like no other technology introduced to agriculture. For one, seed self-replicates whether delib im material GE making not, or humans by sown erately forms other unlike And, completely. contain to possible of harm, such as pesticide drift, the presence detectable. easily ofisn’t felds and seed organic in material GE presence ofpresence organicharvestedin and material seed GE crops remains a and threat to farmers, seed companies, food processors trying to protect the integrity of their organic products. Organic consumers reasonably assume that certifed organic products don’t contain GE material. Indeed, the organic community fought hard standards the when program to organic the from products exclude GE were developed in the 1990s. Therefore, the unwanted dards. dards. Genetically engineered (GE) crops, or geneti cally modifed organisms (GMOs), are pervasive in our agricultural major feld crops are landscape where sugar soybeans, corn, of feld 90% than More grown. beets, and cotton are planted to varieties containing a trait. GE Contamination by GE crops by GE Contamination One of the most contentious today issues is in the planting agriculture of crops derived from genetic engineering, an excluded method in the organic stan tions locate appropriate organic seed. These recommendations. the in ideas described further are low summer squash also have GE counterparts summer squash low also have in the commercial marketplace.

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 54 quate forprotectingmyorganicfarmproduct(s)frompotentialcontamination Figure 18.ThefederalregulationsthatoverseeGEcrop(GMOs)approvalsareade contamination inorganicandconventionalseed Figure 17.SeedcompaniesshouldconducttestingandreportratesofGE(GMO)crop our farmersurvey) ad are equate for protecting my approvals organic farm product(s) from potential contamination (from (GMOs) crop GE oversee that regulations federal The 16. Figure custom their to unacceptable are or threshold internal market at lower prices because levels either exceed their tinely sell produced organically seed to the non-organic revenuerou losing they also when are companies seed below.)described as threshold, Some a such discussing industry-wide threshold for GE material. (The NOSB is an of absence in even up add costs other and Testing contamination inorganicandconventionalseed(fromourfarmersurvey) Figure 15. Seed companies should conduct testing and report rates of GE (GMO) crop - - Neutral Strongly agreeor Strongly disagreeor in theindustry. used genetics plant of percentage high a own that nies compa dollar multi-billion against up they’re if cially recoverlosses,to espe court to can’tgo they to afford GE may offerrecourse,material. Courts but companies say unwanted by incurred losses recouping for able avail mechanism no there’s say companies These ers. Strongly agreeor Neutral Strongly disagreeor - - - - -

55 State of Organic Seed, 2016

------19 When prevention mea We need ongoing oversight need We Those at risk of contamination — Current policies and oversight are woefully inad By comparison, in 2010, about 3 million pounds were applied to US corn fields. fields. corn US to applied were pounds million 3 about 2010, in comparison, By 20 Just as other herbicide-tolerant crops have led to an enormous increase in herbicide use — Roundup Roundup — use herbicide in increase enormous an to led have crops herbicide-tolerant other as Just * rovide stronger oversight of experimental field trials mplement a fair compensation mechanism for those harmed by contamination * In an interesting twist, in 2015 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) discovered that Dow AgroSciences made contradictory claims to the US Patent and Trademark Office about Office Trademark and Patent US the to claims contradictory made AgroSciences Dow that discovered (EPA) Agency Protection Environmental the 2015 in twist, interesting an In * its Enlist Duo herbicide, the mixture of glyphosate and 2,4-D that is marketed to go hand-in-hand with the new generation of corn and soybean seed engineered to tolerate sprays of both herbicides. Dow told EPA that the mixture is no more toxic than either chemical when considered separately. The EPA approved the new herbicide but then discovered that Dow’s asked the court for a chance to reverse its approval of Enlist Duo. patent application claims the herbicide offers something new: “synergistic herbicidal weed control.” The EPA then from GE crops should be responsible for covering losses. p equate for preventing and identifying contamination events at the field trial stage. There needs to be more transparency, monitoring, and restrictions on outdoor trials. i sures fail, and producers and handlers experience contamination, companies that patent, promote, and profit regulations should mandate contamination prevention protocols on the part of owners and users of GE products. GE of users and owners of part the on protocols prevention contamination mandate should regulations of potential impacts Conduct independent analyses resulting from GE crops post- and pre- and independent, rigorous, on based is that and coordinated, and comprehensive more is that and other impacts. commercialization assessments of economic, environmental, health, social, proaches aren’t acceptable. Companies that develop GE products. To that end, the USDA productsshould fill existing regulatory holes by developing new, shouldn’tmandatory regula be left to regulate tionstheir that achieve theown following: Require that GE crop owners and users help prevent contamination New alone. losses and testing, prevention, of burden the shoulder shouldn’t — community organic the including And yet the USDA claims that it doesn’t have the authority to look at indirect harms, such as the consequences the as such harms, indirect at look to authority the have doesn’t it that claims USDA the yet And of escalating herbicide use, damages caused by herbicide drift, largest threats to production agriculture. weeds, now regarded as one of the and the development of herbicide-tolerant New regulations should also abandon the current petition process for “deregulating” GE organisms, because no GE product should be completely outside regulatory review. Furthermore, voluntary, non-regulatory ap Research shows that if 2,4-D corn is introduced, the US could see more than 103 million pounds of 2,4-D ap 2,4-D of pounds million 103 than more see could US the introduced, is corn 2,4-D if that shows Research 2019. by fields corn to plied One glaring example is that in 2015 the USDA approved a new generation of herbicide-tolerant crops engineered engineered crops herbicide-tolerant of generation new a approved USDA the 2015 in that is example glaring One to survive toxic chemicals known to cause severe health impacts: 2,4-D (a component of agent orange) and dicamba. The impact of GE crops goes beyond genetic contamination. Consequences, such as increased pesticide use, with common and real all are health, soil and biodiversity to impacts and farms, neighboring to drift pesticide because incomplete are analyses current USDA’s deregulation. awaiting those and use in currently products GE they don’t sufficiently include these broader issues, all of which are critical to the ideas underpinning “coexis the other. indirectly impacts the viability of system of agriculture directly and tence” – how one The USDA could improve regulatory oversight by first implementing its broad noxious weed authority as de fined by the Plant Protection Act. The law defines a noxious weed as “any plant or plant product directlythat can or indirectly injure or cause damage to crops, irrigation,livestock, navigation,poultry, the natural resourcesor of theother US, the publicinterests health, or the environment.”of agriculture,Clearly, based on this language, USDA has sufficient statutory authority to other issueharms posed by regulationsGE crops. that address economic and What would comprehensive GMO regulatory improvements look like? improvements GMO regulatory comprehensive What would Ready Ready crops have led to an of increase 527 million pounds of applied between 1996 herbicides and 2011 — dicamba. and 2,4-D of use the in increase huge a to lead will crops herbicide-tolerant of generation next this

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 56 eig fot ad ekn vrih o Ms more GMOs of oversight weaken and efforts beling bills labeling havehaveas la introduced, state been preempt to bills GMO mandatory level, federal the At county initiatives. lawsuits fled, including lawsuits to defend these ber of num a been also have There crops. GE new planting on moratorium a passed also County Hawaii ington. Wash and Oregon, California, in passed have GMOs planting on bans county of number A 2016.) July in (Vermont’slegislation. effect into go to frst the be will passing in succeeding Vermont and Maine, necticut, Con with bills, labeling GMO mandatory introduced havestates 30 than more report, ample,2011 our since fll the gaps in federal regulations and oversight. For ex to attempted initiativeshavestate and local Numerous responsibility.regulatory frame work, each agency has, regulatory in different ways, abdicated coordinated their and robust a Lacking few.a name to contamination, by harmed growers ing compensat for mechanism a and monitoring, market post- labeling, GMO mandatory crops, GE of users owners and of prevention part the measures on datory man has left many ogy holes, including the absence of The US’s patchwork approach to regulating biotechnol biotechnology.tions forregulatingagricultural interpreta agency ucts. resulted in This a mishmash of creating instead a of new law to oversee the novel technology,prod the predate which of many laws, existing of patchwork a on rely to chose makers decision aisles, US grocery and felds our in engi landed crops these neered When Administration). Drug and Food and Agency Protection Environmental the with (along The USDA is one three of agencies that regulate GMOs Advocating forstrongerGEcropregulations seedindustry.ing theorganic grow to barrier a as serve them, protecting rights erty example where GE products, and the intellectual prop produce and organic other non-GE varieties. This is an to used seed in material GE for test to companies low al would that activities forbid often agreements companies,these genetics large with agreements licensing in their seed. For companies buying stock seed through Companies also face barriers to eradicating GE material ------up of individuals representing the interests of bio made largely is committee USDA-appointed This quickly becamethebuzzwordoutofUSDA. “Coexistence” coexistence. facilitate” that or actions “bolster other and losses economic dress ad to mechanism compensation appropriate an develop to AC21 directed Secretary The (AC21). tee on Biotechnology and 21st Century Agriculture Commit Advisory the re-convening by uproar the Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack responded to US – of history in one approvals controversial most and the crop field perennial GE first the – alfalfa Ready Roundup of approval 2011 the ing GE more and crops enter US fields evolves and the food supply. technology Follow the as year The urgency for new GMO regulations grows each Is ‘coexistence’ possible? Secretary approvedthem in June2016. the and strong, were recommendations NGRAC’s organic. including farmers, all of needs the meet to exists diversity that ensuring on emphasis an with supply, seed commercial the evaluating for plan a develop help to NGRAC asked Secretary The resources. genetic plant of use and conser vation the to related policies and actions on recommendations providing with charged group USDA-appointed another is NGRAC expertise. its lend (NGRAC) Council Advisory Resources Genetic National the that asked also committee The ply. sup seed non-GE commercial, the in tamination con of the state the on research conduct on to the USDA called in AC21 proposals recommendations. good AC21’s couple a were There burden ontheorganiccommunity. costs, would only exacerbate the disproportionate the bear taxpayers and operations organic where approach, This losses. potential cover to surance in additional for pay would operations organic where mechanism, compensation appropriate an as model insurance crop federal the rec ommended AC21 Furthermore, responsibility. and tion preven of issues the dodge they as inadequate, recommendations the found community organic The recommendations. its published AC21 2012, and there were few stakeholders in attendance. In 2011 in and times 2012. The meetings were five mostly unadvertised met AC21 serve. also tives representa organic of handful a but technology,

------

57 State of Organic Seed, 2016 - - - - to fulfll its obligation to support the success ofsuccess the supportorganic to obligation its fulfll to agriculture since the problem doesn’t exist within the but is NOP, a result of other agency shortcomings, as described. The letter provided the NOSB momentum to further examine the problem. implemented under the 2000 law since it passed. That’s That’s passed. it since law 2000 the under implemented why when the announced USDA in 2015 that it would proposal 2008 a ditching – regulations its update fnally to eager was organiccommunity the – on acted never it engage in a new process to develop stronger and long- regulatory improvements. overdue Barring the creation of an entirely new law that more appropriately fts the novel nature of modern biotech current effort to update its USDA’s nology, regulations the for opportunity an is Act Protection Plant the under for advocate to community non-GE broader and organic environment, the protect better that regulations stronger human health, farmers, and markets from sensitive the 56). page of (see crops impacts GE indirect and direct How has organic confront GMOs? policy changed to In 2012, after receiving dozens of comments from the letter ofa topic wrote the NOSB on the public GMOs, to Secretary Vilsack describing these concerns as they relate to organic integrity. The letter asked the USDA broadly. Whatis a remains dra a major need, however, broadly. matic overhaul of regulations for all stages of GMO development, including experimental feld trials; envi ronmental, economic, social, and food safety analyses; a need We monitoring. post-market and labeling; GMO truly to regulating GMOs coordinatedacross approach agencies and stages in product development. It’s important to understand that the USDA has been operating under regulations promulgated in the 1980s ofAct 1957. Pest Plant the by provided authority under In 2000, Congress combination a passed was it as law the new a much so Plant wasn’t which Protection Act, regu to authority USDA give that laws ofexisting three late products of biotechnology – the Plant Pest Act, the Plant Quarantine Act of 1912, and Act Weed the of Noxious 1974. Yet no new regulations have been

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 58 cess to appropriate seed. As discussed in Chapter 2, giv ac is producers organic of success the to Paramount following the way: in policy purity seed a potential of premise the scribes de subcommittee The 2016. in expected is proposal no organic seedavailableno organic togrowers. in result could this corn, especially threshold), exceed that levels (i.e., regions production seed in tamination con GE of levels high in result conditions ronmental envi if years, certain in example, For standard. wide industry- an establishing before type,crop important is by especially threshold, a of feasibility the derstanding un Fully suppliers. seed on burden much too threshold create a should seed organic less to leading dard stan a of consequence unintended the is concern One seed.However,of, organic theissueiscomplex. sourcing and investmentin, more incentivizemay seed they grow. A threshold and/or non-organic for organic rely on conventional seed for the at crops least some of seed supply,thein organic en gaps mostproducersstill topic topic for comment in public 2012 and 2013. tems. Two discussion documents were released on the sys production organic in used seed for standard rity pu genetic a establishing of feasibility the at looking began subcommittee The organic. in contamination GMO address to ways new exploring begin to mittee TheNOSB then established a GMO ad hoc subcom * Read OSA’s detailed comments on NOSB’s seed purity discussion documents at at documents discussion purity seed NOSB’s on comments detailed OSA’s Read * www.seedalliance.org. www.seedalliance.org. resources thatbreedersrelyonforimprovingagriculturalcrops Patents havethepotentialtoremovevaluablegeneticmaterialfrompoolof ited andcontrolled. organic feed, crops,of and food could be lim contamination GMO which at chain supply the in point effcient and impactful most the GMOs. maybe Seed of presence unintended and/or potential the limit to steps stronger for foods organic of pro consumers and both ducers by concern strong a indicate to Standards Board (NOSB) and NOP continue Organic National to comments public The * A policy policy A ------• • • • ing aseedpuritystandardinclude: establish before answer to questions important Some (e.g., opportunity costs of buffers), losses incurred incurred losses buffers), of costs opportunity (e.g., measures prevention costs, testing for compensation collect to way no currently There’sefforts. prevention best their despite met be can’treliably threshold a and problem a routinely is contamination where situation a in themselves fnd who – others and producers, seed any recourse for operations sence – of seed companies, ab the is discussion threshold this in challenge One • • • •

Can we meet market demand for organic seed with a with seed organic for demand market meetwe Can threshold? the to meets also access that germplasm have high-quality enough companies production seed Will available tocustomers? levelscontent makeGE to willing suppliers seed Are pro posed thresholds? meet could farms organic sold on planted and commercially seed at-risk the of much How ing cropproduction? dur drift pollen sown,including is seed “clean” after contamination of routes other to attributed be can problem contamination ongoing the of much How lines, foundation seed,andcommercialseed? breeding in presence and contamination, of quency fre the type, crop by levels GE including level, seed Do we contamination understand at the the extent of ing andthresholdrequirement? What’s a reasonable timeline for implementing a test icy, limitingaccesstomorediverse offerings? varietiespol availabletop this maketheir under only companies some will Or, seed? organic supplying of nies fnd the new policy too burdensome and opt out compa some will words, few other a In suppliers? major of hands the into seed of management and ownership concentrating without place in threshold a with seed organic for demand market meetwe Can mity inourfelds? unifor genetic increasing without place in threshold ------

59 State of Organic Seed, 2016 ------In this memo the 21 There especially in are plant varieties, * Cell fusion is an excluded method when the donor or recipient organism is derived using techniques of recombinant DNA technol ogy (including gene deletion, gene doubling, introducing a foreign gene, and changing the positions of genes when achieved by recom binant DNA technology), and involving the direct introduction into the techniques or ganism of hereditary materials prepared out side the organism (such as microinjection). However, the NOP further concludes that cell fusion (including protoplast the when method fusion) excluded an considered not is donor cells/protoplasts fall within the same taxonomic plant family, and when donor or recipient organisms are not of techniques technology. DNA recombinant derived using Cell fusion techniques are an excluded meth od when the donor cells/protoplasts do not fall within the same taxonomic plant family. Spurring this discussion were concerns plant some Spurringthat were discussion this organic used by varieties farmers using developed were ofdefnition the in included ex technique a fusion, cell cluded methods. NOP concluded that: NOP concluded that: the Brassica family, that have been developed using cell developed been that have family, Brassica the fusion to confer desired traits in hybrid breeding pro grams, such as cytoplasmic male sterility. These tech other crops as well. niques are used in In response to these concerns, the NOP published a policy memo on February 1, 2013: “Cell Fusion Tech niques Used in Seed Production.” - - - - - These discussions raise important important raise discussions These

criteria should guide organic plant breeding decisions? decisions? breeding plant organic guide should criteria Where does the organic community draw the line on certain methods? and bigger questions, such as: Which principles and * An NOP policy memo states: “In the scientific literature, cell fusion is defined as the fusing of two cells to form a single cell. Natural cell fusion is integral to plant growth; egg fer culture.” tissue using propagation general in as well as programs hybridization and breeding traditional many in used is fusion cell programs, breeding plant In example. one is tilization may may have on farmer access to seed. Meanwhile, the Organic IFOAM World Congress recently passed two resolutions on organic plant breeding that may affect breeding in the US. ing how best to addresscertaintobest how“excluded ing methods” as organicThe techniques. breeding plant to pertain they ofgoodunderstanding a exten lacks how community sive controversial techniques are used, whether these techniques confict with the principles of organic ag riculture, and what implications a defnition change high with the added challenge ofhigh with the added meeting a threshold. The NOSB explores methods’ definition ‘excluded changes to the Since our 2011 report, the NOSB has begun discuss for seed producers and suppliers may only increase with increase only may suppliers and producers seed for a threshold in place and could be passed on to farmers formvarieties. of the fewer in and/or costs seed higher This could discourage further investments in organic seed because the costs of production might prove too This reality makes it that much strengthen regulations more and oversight for GE important crops, as to described on page 56, and implement a fair compen sation mechanism. Without a safety net to cover inci dences of contamination, the fnancial burden and risk from not being able to sell that seed, or costs associated associated costs or seed, that sell to able being not from up seed lines. with cleaning

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 60 trends in the global seed industry. seed global the in trends including graphics, information and concentration articles State through agribusiness Michigan followed of has Howard University Phil Dr. (DOJ). Justice of Department US the by unchecked go to continue acquisitions and mergers major and report, 2011 our Consolidation in the seed hasn’tindustry slowed since in the seedindustry consolidation Increased able techniques andproducts. question of appropriateness the about arise questions when consult to stakeholders organic other and fers certi for resources on working also is NOSB The ed. they should be exclud if techniques when determining controversial of evaluation the guide help will 2016, in expected proposal, Its decisions. and discussions ods meth excluded these guide to criteria and principles, defnitions, developing in progress making is NOSB seed. organic But breeders,the especially developers of plant by used currently are techniques these of some the science. There’s also a data lack on of how of extensive understanding suffcient lacks community organic broader the because diffcult are techniques breeding controversial involving discussions Policy biology. ic bycussed NOSB,the synthet and editing such gene as techniques are being Beyonddis cell fusion, dozens of command 86% of the retail market for corn. for market retail the of 86% command ing, where four major biotechnology and chemical frms tell more it’seven type crop By 1996. in 22% from up market, seed global the of half than more control tively (Monsanto,frmsThree DuPont, Syngenta)andcollec 2016, Bayer announced a bid to purchase Monsanto. bid to buy the Swiss company failed in 2015. And, in MayMonsanto’s after 2016 in Syngenta purchase would it that AgroSci ences) Dow is under regulatory of review. (owner ChemChina Chemical announced Dow and DuPont industryare discussing major mergers. A merger between the writingthis Asof report, of the largest players in the fve-year2013). - (2008 period eight acquired frms more than 70 companies during a top The rate. rapid a at continues and consolidation that vegetables, including crops, other in growing is trend the by consolidation, and impacted highly are cotton soybeans, corn, while that reveals research cent 22

Howard’s most re Howard’smost 23 The top The ------less choice for farmers andskyrocketing prices.less choice forfarmers meantsoybeanshas and concentrationcorn in levelof ity patents as they are applied to seed, among other other requests. among strong seed, to applied are they as patents ity util universities,grant of abuseaddresstheto land and our to accessible and public germplasm keep to consolidation, industry seed confront to agencies the on called Farmers workshop. each at delivered com ments public of subject prominent a remained seed yet – cattle to hogs to poultry from – industries tural Thepublic comments represented agricul a range of response tothecompellingevidenceputforward. in action take to failed agencies the comments, written 18,000 than more and workshops public well-attended despite yet, And agriculture. in issues antitrust amine ex to effort an in forces joined departments two the workshopsture. These were historic. agricul Never had before in issues regulatory and competition discuss to country the across workshops fve hosted agencies The industry. seed the in conduct anticompetitive at In 2010, the DOJ and USDA to takebegan a hard look innovation. encourage and power economic of concentration undue prevent to needed is oversight antitrust of form the in tection hsmre n 2 f the soybean retail market. this market and 62% of of 66% for account DuPont) and (Monsanto frms two DuPont accounted for 60% of theseapplications. DuPont accountedfor60%of and Monsanto 2008, and varieties.2004 plant Between on patents utility of owners two top the also are seed on IPR from tremendously profted have that leaders industry two top the that surprise no it’s so pensive, ex are Patents described. just mergers and quisitions ac the to led products patented licensing from profts enormous The resources. genetic and fnancial of tion (IPR) concentra the rights facilitated developers crop property to awarded intellectual of expansion An e, otay o h cam o hs IR wes pat owners, IPR these of claims the to contrary Yet, ae curd ihu consolidation. without occurred have would what to relative slowed” or dropped intensity research cotton “private concentrated and more became soybean, markets corn, the as that documented USDA the biotechnology, plant appears in example, For opposite true. the fact, In improvement. crop in ents and restrictive licenses haven’t innovation spurred 27 Market pro 25

24 26 This

------

61 State of Organic Seed, 2016 - - - - - Estimated total inbred lines Estimated non-GE inbred lines Estimated untreated, non-GE inbred lines It’s It’s also important to note that public plant breeding programs may use and rely on IPRs very differently than trade, where the theprivate latter more often re lies on proprietary lines for income generated. In the words of one plant breeder, “I think that public and programs breeding different to held be should private standards regarding the ‘acceptable’ level of IPR be cause the funding sources are so different.” Nonetheless, the concerns of public who feel plant constrained in their breeders work by restrictive IPRs Owners Owners of utility patents control far-reaching have over access and use of their protected products. While the utility farmers, and researchers for exemptions has PVPA patents can be legally enforced to forbid access to pro for ofmaterial genetic purposes tected as well research poten the have therefore Patents saving. seed on-farm as ofpool the geneticfrom material valuable remove to tial agricultural improving for on rely breeders that resources What do hinges crops. access breeders sometimes have agreements. licensing on restrictive The ofabuse IPR in has not been documented well the public plant breeding community. What we know is that public do breeders’ experiences vary widely depending on the crop type and breeding Some public program. breeders haven’t been impacted by re strictive IPRs, while others cite enormous constraints. - - - Fig. 19 Estimated comparison of corn inbred line availability Fig. 19 Estimated comparison utility patent on a lifeform. (The PTO had originally refused to this award patent, but the US Board of Pat it.) granted and disagreed Interferences and Appeals ent plant on their farm. Although many breeders still use PVP protections Congress’s concernstoday, regarding but – realized been have plants and property intellectual not because of At the turn this oflaw. the twenty-frst century, the Supreme Court upheld a case where the Patent and Trademark Offce (PTO) awarded the frst The law represented a compromise: Breeders have the right exclusive to propagate and market the variety for 20 years, but the law provides important exemptions: (1) can protected be varieties used for and research, (2) farmers can save seed from protected varieties to re genetic resources, and increasing market concentration. market increasing and resources, genetic convinc in successful eventually was trade seed the But warranted.This was protection Congressmore ing that came in the form of a “patent-like” protection under of Protection Act (PVPA) 1970. the Plant Variety Awarding utility Awarding patents to seed developers is relatively new. Congress long argued that sexually reproducing plants shouldn’t be awarded utility patents – “patents for invention” under the US Patent Act – for fear of curtailing innovation, threatening the free exchange of The privatization seed innovation on organic of seed and impacts Figure 17. Estimated comparison of corn inbred line availability Figure 17. Estimated comparison

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 62 that is, without chemical seed treatments prohibited prohibited treatments seed chemical without is, that – form untreated an in them license to unwilling are and these that lines own companies most of chemical biotechnology largest The production. seed their for lines inbred licensing on rely programs breeding have don’t that companies corn seed Hybrid others. challenges than more face counterparts) GE with crops (or traits GE have that crops with dealing companies example, For varies. also IPR with interaction sector’s private the – program and type crop by differs IPR with experience breeders’ where – sector public the to Similar sector. private the into extends that trend a purposes, production seed and breeding for plasm germ to access limited is consequence one tioned, men As seed? organic impact trends these do How research – even simplyincludingthevariety inatrial. pro other and breeding prohibit licenses some since grams, breeding their for desire they varieties using to obstacle an as licenses restrictive identifed 1) Chapter re breeders sponding to our organic researcher of survey (described in number A patent.” the under rights as a plant breeder because companies their could assert wouldn’ttouch I There’sgermplasm intent. the is that effect, adding, “utility patents can tie up everything, and “chilling” this reiterates breeder plant public Another are worth noting. Asoneplantbreederremarked: resources to dothat. people’s patents. We don’tof kind havethat licensing begin to all at position a in not are breeders Public space. that in diff work to very cult very, it’s think I sector, public the for especially breeding, plant for I think Overall, activity. less breeding, plant less means then that and patent, on their fringing in or litigation avoid it, to from try you’d away because stay likely you’d on, of thinking working or on working were you that trait a patent to trying even or patenting was somebody that knew you if that sense the in breeding on effect chilling a have they that think I … future. the for concerns real are these think I availablegermplasm. freely for potential the limiting breeders, plant sector public of loss the impinging are that factors I think utility patents are a one number of of ------aini theydecidetotestillegally. if gation liti risking of position vulnerable a in seed “clean” of supplier a as reputation their protect to want that nies licensed lines for patented, GE traits. This puts compa testing prohibit to agreements for it’scommon tioned, men as Furthermore, production. seed and breeding independent for lines appropriate to access of lack to due limited be to continues seed organic in choice yet and US the in crops organic planted widely most the of one is corn Field 17). Figure (see form untreated an available, only 8% are available as a non-GE line and in lines hybrid 1,900 Eh than more Mac of that House, estimates rhardt, Seed Lea Albert of president The license. a without lines these use to illegal It’s standards. organic the in naturally occurring DNA segment is a productnature of ics (2013), the Supreme Court unanimously held that “a Genet v.Myriad Pathology Molecular for Association In company. diagnostic molecular a Genetics, Myriad by issuewere breast cancer genes identifed and sequenced case,at frstthe savingInpatentedseed. relatesto it as human genes, and (2) theof patent exhaustion doctrine patentabilitythe (1) cases:relevant two on ruled States Unitedthe of SupremeCourtthelife.2013, onInents Since our last report, lawsuits have challenged utility pat asan“end-user.”tem andrelegated sys seed the from removed They’repressures. disease and soils,climates, regional to seed adapt to ability the lose they expenses, input annual higher shoulder only not year,farmers each seed repurchase to forced being today.haveBy we varieties and crops domesticated of very diversity tremendous the the establish helped that practice – seed replanting and saving from farmers like soybeans and cotton, have been enforced to restrict As for impacts to farmers, patents on major feld crops, from the seed system and relegated as as an ‘end-user.’ relegated and system seed the from removed are They pressures. disease and soils, climates, regional to seed adapt to higher shoulder annual input expenses, they only lose the not ability farmers year, each seed repurchase to forced being By ------

63 State of Organic Seed, 2016 ------Beyond try 29 (The decision 28

* Ensure open access to plant genetics to preserve and resource expand this invaluable Improve choice, availability, and quality of cultivars, for organic appropriate systems especially cultivars Support the viability of independent seed companies plant breeders and individual Help overcome resource constraints smaller entities to compete and enable

reiterated, however, that the Court still views utility pat reiterated, however, Myriad the Whether appropriate.) pat varieties plant how on ents challenge further to open door a leaves ruling Elena Justice seen. be to remains seed to applied are ents today holding “Our does. it suggest comments Kagan’s is limited – addressing the situation before us, she self-replicatinga product,” everyinvolving thanone rather becoming are inventions such that recognize “We wrote. complex and more diverse.” prevalent, ever The second case, Bowman Monsanto, refected v. that In complexity. this case the Supreme Court ruled that “patent exhaustion does not permit a farmer to repro duce patented seed through planting and without harvesting the patent permission.” holder’s and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolat been has it because merely eligible patent not and ed,” invalidating Myriad’s gene patents. ing to save money, this farmer was challenging the rela the farmerthis challenging was money, save to ing living ofon paradigm patents new utility allowing tively organisms. In a third case, the Organic Seed ers and Trade Grow Association sued Monsanto challenging some of its patents on GE seed. The court effectively dismissing the case. sided with Monsanto by be sure, utility To patents are the wrong protection for seed (and innovations other lifeforms, for that matter). occurring naturally on of especially misuse The patents, oftrend traits The patenting confronted. be must traits, that also occur in nature is a growing threat to the free ofexchange germplasm. • • • • It’s equally It’s important to establish new approaches and more supportfarmers to and breeders plant for models In distribution. and production, breeding, decentralized group alter explore to working a facilitated OSA 2011, native models for keeping seed in the public domain. The working group, which grew out of a 2011 report recommendation, decided that for an intellectual prop erty it must: model to be “alternative”

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 64 by patentsorothermeans, andtoincludethisPledgewithany transferoftheseseedsortheirderivatives.” ** The pledge states: “You have the freedom to use these OSSI-Pledged seeds in any way you choose. In return, you pledge not to restrict others’ use of these seeds or their derivatives and “brilliantwhitecauliflower,”tonamea few. lettuce,” “red head,” broccoli “exerted broccoli,” “heat-tolerant carrots,” in color “red include: nature in occurred long have that traits general for awarded patents utility of Examples * availableeveryone.freely to main re to varieties these for intent their communicate to and that breeders farmers can use on their seed packets pledge a create to initiativedecided source,”the “open deemed seed for license enforceable legally a create to a protected commons for seed. After fnding it diffcult create to aims OSSI movement, software open-source the by Inspired Initiative. Seed Source Open the form plant breeders, seed companies, and NGOs to farmers, of group a organized Wisconsin-Madison, of versity Uni the after,at JackSoon sociologist a Kloppenburg, • • • • interest from students, farmers, and other researchers in are witnessing growing Public plant breeding programs public in plant breeding investments Insufficient fundinggaps. to fllimportant helping – variety’sdevelopment the in involved grams pro breeding plant organic the to royalties returning licenses don’tstill researchwhile savingfuture seed or prohibit These varieties. organic new of distribution the support that licenses fair develop to working also are companies seed organic and universities, NGOs, more than300varieties. a interest lot in of the US and abroad, and currently lists 20 years. This means our infrastructure for developing for infrastructure our means This years. 20 last the over breeders plant public of 30% than more crops. Indeed, as in reported Chapter 1, the US has lost some for especially extinction, of risk at are programs these retire, breeders public and wanes funding as ly, Unfortunate agriculture. organic of needs the serving

ous licensing contracts, and fear of unintentional unintentional patent infringement of fear and contracts, licensing ous oner cost, denial, outright to due ac genetics cessing to barriers including genetics, plant pat of the enting from resulting trends problematic Reverse sharingandcoordination information Encourage Meet plant participatory the breeding need projects of plant for compensation breeding contributions fair including breeding, plant in innovation further that investments Foster ** OSSI has generated generated has OSSI ------plant breeding programs, makes the need to increase to need the makes programs, breeding plant public for support waningindustry, with seed coupled conventional the in concentration market of level The pests anddiseases.portant im tolerate that varieties as such needs, production organic their to, adapted and for, selected varieties on dependent especially are farmers Organic agriculture. organic of needs the as such industry,private for ity prior aren’ta that needs lucrative less yet critical ing communities they feed. In plant breeding, this the often means address and farmers for level regional the at gaps research important fll and good, public the alarming.researchservePublicshouldis trend This plantbreeders, isdeteriorating. tion of new public plant varieties, and training the next genera breeders, and seed companies to join policy advocacy policy join to companies seed and breeders, plant producers, seed farmers, more Weneed holders. stake seed organic of diversity the represent who ple Moving forward, we need more leaders and spokespeo efforts.policy in participate to responsibility and tunity community,seed organic oppor an the As share weall Summary needs. their prioritize don’t dollars research public if regions and systems production their for appropriate most seed access to lack to continue will farmers Organic period. has averaged about 0.19% annually over that same time AFRI centage funding of dedicated to organic research Figure 18). But according to USDA’s own data, the per (see 23% by increased program AFRI the for funding 2015, and 2011 Between growth. signifcant seen has AFRI research. seed organic other and breeding plant organic in investments adequate ensure to agriculture organic of needs the prioritize must – (AFRI) tiative USDA’s especially Ini ResearchFood and Agriculture – programs research agricultural other from (OREI), funding Initiative Extension and Research Organic pro research grams focused for on organic funding agriculture, increasing such to as USDA’s addition In muchthat urgent. more farmers of needs seed organic the addresses that breeding plant public for funding ------

65 State of Organic Seed, 2016 - - - - The USDA is work is USDA The Compiled by National Organic Coalition Compiled by National Organic Stronger guidance must be coupled with regular with coupled be must guidance Stronger A database that provides a list comprehensive of seed suppliers from participating in a database be must addressed to establish a functional and well-populated sustainable a on operate should database This database. funding model that allows for its long-term ideally with NOP support. success, regulations crop GE Strengthen ing to update its biotechnology regulations under the for particular crop types. This data could come from, or from, come could data This types. crop particular for support, organic a more robust seed database. Increase certifer and trainings inspector in organ seed ic trainings for certifers and inspectors on organic seed. example, certifersFor should be trained on availability and regions, types, crop specifc to pertain they as issues scale. Certifers and inspectors will be better equipped to evaluate the adequacy of organic seed sourcing ef forts. The NOP and certifcation community should regularly the communicate importance of organic seed to the integrity ofthe organic label. Fund and promote a national organic seed data base organic seed in available the marketplace is still lacking Finder OrganicSeed make effortsto signifcant despite report.last organicBarriersour keeping since success a - - - The fnal guidance should SDA competitive grant research funding trends (2010–2017) trends research funding grant SDA competitive u each each year to determine if and when there is adequate ofuse the require to volume and diversity organic seed seed requirement is essential to the development of development the to essential is requirement seed or ofsourcing organicincreased the as systems, seed ganic organ in investments further on effects ripple have will also recommend the with NOP certiwork ic seed. We availability seed organic reviewing for process a on fers Recommendations Improve the National Organic Program’s organic seed guidance document be amended to include the recommendations listed on pages 50-51. Appropriate enforcement of the organic broad broad base of support for and policies models that are working. Just as we need diverse decisionthe entire organic makersseed chain, we need alongdiverse voices in our organic too. seed The advocacy, recommendations – if achievable are below described organized. we’re At At times certain stakeholders may feel constrained in their ability to participate in advocacy work because of most ofconcerns around formalYet lobbying. the work before us is education, storytelling, and organizing a efforts so the organic seed community can speak with a with speak can community seed organic the so efforts louder voice in conversations happening in the media, in the halls of the USDA, on Capitol Hill, and across the US at the local and state level. Figure 18. Figure

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 66 Address the recommendations of the Advisory Advisory 21 for the Biotechnology on Committee of recommendations the Address pesticides. reviewsof andrigorous gredients culture. labeling for includes GMO This mandatory in agri organic to risks potential the and biotechnology update their policies and regulations to address modern Agency and Food and Drug Administration should also EnvironmentalProtection framework. The current the from absent currently are that components critical er oth among monitoring, post-market create and crops; GE new of assessments social and economic, environmental, health, independent include owners; patent by for paid is that losses for mechanism compensation fair a establish owners; us patent and manufacturers, ers, of part the on prevention contamination datory improve experimental GE crop trials; require man must oversight of changes These Act. Protection Plant should also move quickly to implement the recommen USDA The level. seed the at contamination of extent the examine to system a establish should USDA The marketplace.commercial the in options seed versityof di adequate an ensuring and supply seed non-GE and organic the in contamination on data comprehensive posals on research and seed quality, including collecting pro useful include did recommendations the systems, farming different between “coexistence” fostering for ideas acceptable provide to failed Agriculture of tary Council ry Adviso Resources Genetic National and riculture of organic seed. The NOSB should continue working continue should NOSB The seed. organic of contamination preventing of responsibility the share crops GE of users and owners, patent manufacturers, that ensure to needed urgently are regulations stronger role use to its the advisory USDA to communicate that contamination GE addressing in Board Standards Organic National the Support administeringresearchfederal agencies grants. universitiesat rights and property intellectual with ated changes to the law, as well as changes to policies associ inform should fndings These research. seed other and breeding plant funded publicly of context the in ated lic seed research pub on Act Bayh-Dole the of effect the Examine tecting seeddiversity, integrity, andmarket choice. pro for proposals include NGRAC,which of dations While the AC21’s report to the US Secre US the to AC21’s report the While The The Bayh-Dole Act should be evalu h NS should NOSB The st Century Ag Century ------complex, given the potential risks and benefts associ benefts and risks potential the are given complex, discussion broader and science The organic production. in allowed be should methods certain using developed seed whether determine community ganic on excluded methods. frameworkThis will help the or decisions future and current guide will that defnitions and criteria, principles,clarifying in progress making is NOSB The standards. organic the in methods cluded ex for defnition regulatory current the haveoutpaced methods excluded Board addressing in Standards Organic National the Support paid forby patentowners. that’smechanism compensation fair a with coupled be standard purity seed any that important It’s standard. purity seed a establishing of feasibility the determine to stakeholders other and suppliers seed organic with sexually reproducing plants, but only when used as the of rights marketingown developersto for tool priate appro an is Act VarietyProtection Plant The plants. shouldn’t be patents for awarded seed and Utility seed. save to ability farmer’s a and assessments, formance research,publicthatprohibits manner per safetyand a in enforced be can agreements, licensing restrictive con be fronted must genetics plant on patents Utility these mergers. of impacts the investigate also should generals torneys at businesses.State seed independent on and seed, of price the choice, farmer on impacts tremendous has scale this at consolidation seed hearings,since regional and period comment a through mega-mergers of view re the in participate to invited be should public The IPRs are being used to unfairly maintain market power. that evidence any address to (IPR) rights property tual intellec and antitrust governing laws of interface the consider must investigation market seed Any needed. urgently, more into these two – is desperately proposed mega-mergers and, – structure current the of pacts im the into investigationextensive writing. An this of time the at mergers discussing companies six of top the four with merge, to continue players largest agriculture. The in sectors concentrated most the of one industry seed the in mergers anticompetitive block must USDA and DOJ The ated withvarious methods. Utility patents, especially when coupled with with coupled when especially patents, Utility h se idsr is industry seed The New technologies New ------

67 State of Organic Seed, 2016

------other philanthropists don’t fund the priorities discussed discussed priorities the fund don’t philanthropists other bar major a as viewed be must This fact chapter. this in rier to increasing the quality, and availability, integrity of organic seed – and to achieving our broader goal of transforming farmwe how and what eat we to ensure a and planet. people healthier also increase Sustainable USDA’s Agriculture and Re level intended program to its (SARE) Education search of funding ($60 million). Agriculture Finally, USDA’s and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) is intended to ad of sectors all dress ad In organic. agriculture, including projects, breeding organic more plant to funding dition the department should create a distinct funding stream for public cultivar development to more broadly sup port public plant programs breeding in the US that are at risk of extinction. advocacy seed organic toward funding moreDirect The organic capacity community’s to organize around policy issues that organic advance seed as a to solution the challenges we face in agriculture – including chang ing climates and toxic pesticides in our – environment is insuffcient. This is in part because foundations and ------Intellectual prop Intellectual USDA’s Organic USDA’s Research and Extension Ini The funding has remained stagnant over the years. Con years. the over stagnant remained has funding The gress increase should OREI signifcantly funding to for organic plant and urgent demand the growing meet breeding and organic seed research. Congress should Increase funding for that supportfunding programs Increase public organic plant breeding and other organic seed re search tiative (OREI) is the most critical funding source research. seed fororganic other and breeding plant organic especially at our land Models grantwill dif universities. fer program by breeding and and goals, by maybe crop regularandopenly communicate shouldBreeders type. ly with offces technology about and transfer problems of regardingsolutions exchange the seed. seed for on-farmseed use. Promote appropriate intellectual property rights models for organic plant breeding erty rights models that adhere to the principles of fair promoted, be should benefts shared and diversity, ness, law intended: allowing researchers to further innovate further to innovate researchers allowing intended: law with protected varieties and allowing farmers to save

Chapter 3: State of Organic Seed Policy 68 Conclusion and Recommendations

he recommendations from each of the three chapters are summarized below to serve as a roadmap for build- Ting organic seed systems over the next fve years. (More details for each recommendation are included in the individual chapters.) We hope these recommendations guide conversations and actions moving forward, and help stakeholders identify their role in this critical work. We need all stakeholders – organic farmers, organic seed producers, organic certifers, policy advocates, plant breeders, organic seed and food companies, and others – to help implement this roadmap. No single stakeholder group can address the diverse seed needs of organic farmers alone. When actions are guided by a shared vision and roadmap, the progress is faster, more coordinated, and longer lasting.

In this way, the State of Organic Seed project is a collaborative one. Just as a healthy agricultural system relies on biological diversity, this work requires a diversity of opinion, experience, and interests. Together we can grow a healthier future beginning with organic seed.

» Organic plant breeding

Expand the infrastructure of public and private organic plant breeding programs Breeders say they have limited access to appropriate certifed organic acreage, winter nurseries, and greenhouses to conduct variety trials and organic breeding work.

Prioritize successful models and approaches to organic plant breeding Organic plant breeding requires different approaches because the production systems are different from conventional systems, as are the values, principles, and regulations associated with organic agriculture.

Develop new, and expand existing, organic variety trials at the regional and national level Variety trials provide essential performance data to farmers and researchers but many need more coordination in management, evaluation, and the dissemination of results.

Improve access to GMO-free breeding material for at-risk crops Breeders need access to more breeding lines for major crops, especially corn, that are appropriate for organic seed production.

» Organic seed supply State of Organic Seed, 2016

Train more organic seed producers and support existing producers There is an urgent need to provide more formal training and resources to increase the number of organic seed producers in a variety of crops and at different scales. 69 Develop region-specifc resources on production data and practices Organic seed producers need yield and economic data by crop type and region, as well as resources on organic seed pest and disease management, to support their success. - - - - The fnal guidance should be Explore subsidy or other incen other or subsidy Explore This include would identifying major gaps Seed production contracts often place risks place often contracts production Seed Many organic seed stakeholders want to see an Organic seed producers are challenged by a lack lack a by challenged are Organicproducers seed Stronger guidance must be coupled with regular train regular with coupled be must guidance Stronger The barriers keeping organic seed suppliers from par from suppliers seed organic keeping barriers The High-quality stock seed is critical for supporting the success success the supporting for critical is seed stock High-quality The National Organic Program should work with certifers and Organic seed producers need better access to testing for germination and Organic seed policy Organic

Fund and promote a national organic seed database ticipating in a database like Organic Seed Finder must be addressed to establish a list comprehensive of organic available. seed ings for certifers in organic and inspectors seed. Establish a review of organic seed availability seed suppliers on a process for reviewing organic seed availability each year to determine if and when there is ad from, come could data This of use types. the crop particularrequire for to seed organic volume and diversity equate or support, a more robust organic seed database. » Improve the National Organic Program’s organic seed guidance document amended to include the recommendations listed on pages 50-51. seed organic in trainings inspector and certiferIncrease Work with organic Work food companies that contract specifc varieties (or insuffcient quantities ofin varieties loop specifc a for organicfeedback organic and developing varieties) food grown be can varieties the so companies seed organic to needs these communicate to handlers other and processors organically in suffcient quantity. and of organic the commercial seed sector. Create a public education campaign to promote organic seed educational campaign directed at farmers, gardeners, and consumers about the benefts of organic seed, what goes has a higher price tag. it often and why into its development, Develop Develop quality assurance programs other quality including characteristics, genetically engineered content. Some seed enterprises need help developing quality assurance programs. programs seed stock organic improve and Develop on seed producers without premium payment or assurances from seed companies. or assurances without premium payment on seed producers production seed organic to inherent risks economic farmersthe Protectfrom programs to encouragetive farmers to integrateproduction into their organic seed farm plans. Create regional and national organic seed producernetworks seed organic national Createregionaland storage. and handling with support more need and equipment, cleaning and harvesting seed ofappropriate to access ofrisks sharethe that contracts Develop production seed organic

Conclusion and Recommendations 70 Strengthen regulations governing genetically engineered crops Improvements must include better oversight of experimental trials; mandatory contamination prevention measures on the part of users, manufacturers, and patent owners; and a fair compensation mechanism for losses, among other improvements.

Address the recommendations of USDA’s biotechnology and genetic resource advisory groups The USDA should collect comprehensive data on the organic and non-GE seed supply to ensure an adequate diversity of choice, and establish a system to examine the extent of contamination at the seed level.

Examine the effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on public seed research The Bayh-Dole Act should be evaluated in the context of publicly funded seed research to inform policies on how plant genetic resources are shared and protected at our land grant universities.

Support the National Organic Standards Board in addressing seed purity and excluded methods The NOSB should continue working with organic stakeholders to determine the feasibility of establishing a seed purity standard and to fnalize an excluded methods proposal that clarifes the principles, criteria, and defnitions that will guide current and future decisions on methods used in plant breeding.

Address problems of market concentration The Department of Justice should investigate the broad impacts of the current seed industry structure, including two proposed mergers between some of the largest players, and engage the public in its review process.

Confront utility patents on plant genetics Utility patents, especially when coupled with restrictive licensing agreements, can be enforced in a manner that prohibits public research, safety and performance assessments, and a farmer’s ability to save seed.

Promote appropriate intellectual property rights models for organic plant breeding Models that adhere to the principles of fairness, diversity, and shared benefts should be promoted, especially for publicly funded research.

Direct more funding toward organic seed advocacy Organic seed policy work is lacking in part because foundations and other philanthropists don’t fund the priorities discussed in this report – this is a risk point to the goal of establishing an organic food system built on a foundation of organic seed. State of Organic Seed, 2016

71 - , No. 12-398 Environmental , January. , No. 11-796 (U.S. May 13, 2013). , National Family Farm Coalition, accessed Out of Hand: Farmers Face the Consequences of a , September 28. Nature Biotechnology Matson, James, M. Tang, and S. Wynn. 2012. “Intellectual Property and Property “Intellectual 2012. Wynn. S. and Tang, M. James, Matson, Market Power in the Seed Industry: The Shifting Foundation of Food Our System,” University of Wisconsin Law School Government and Legislative Clinic, September 1. Ibid. Hubbard, K. 2009. Consolidated Seed Industry at www.farmertofarmercampaign.org. Pardey, Philip, B. Koo, J. Drew, J. Horwich, and C. Nottenburg. 2013. “The evolving landscape of plant varietal rights in the United States, 1930 – 2008,” AmberWaves, 2004. Schimmelpfennig. D. and Jorge Fernandez-Cornejo, “Have Seed Industry Changes Affected Research Effort?” USDA/ERS, February. Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics (U.S. June 13, 2013). Bowman v. Monsanto Company Organic Trade Association. 2011. Comments on the National Organic Stock Planting and Seedlings, Annual “Seeds, guidance, draft Program’s (NOP 5029).” in Organic Crop Production USDA-ERS. 2015. “Adoption of genetically engineered US,” crops accessed at in http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of- the genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-us.aspx. USDA-NASS. 2012 Census of Agriculture, 2014 OS - Certified and Ex empt Organic Farm Data. See Table 19: Value of Organic Crops Loss from Presence of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) – Certified 2014 and Earlier Years, pp. 199-200. and Exempt Organic Farms: Benbrook, Charles M. 2012. “Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the U.S. – the first sixteen years,” Sciences Europe Ibid. Seed in Used Techniques Fusion “Cell 2013. Program. Organic National Production,” Policy Memo 13-1, February 1. September. Personal communication. 2013. Philip H. Howard,

23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. - - - - - Sci , September 12. 12. September , Nature 102: 172-177. Field Crops Research , August 1.

USDA-NASS. 2012 Census of Agriculture, 2014 Organic Survey – Certi – Survey Organic 2014 Agriculture, of Census 2012 USDA-NASS. fied and Exempt Organic Farm Data, accessed at https://www.agcen sus.usda.gov/Publications/Organic_Survey/. standard. 7 CFR 205.204: Seeds and planting stock practice National Organic Program. 2013. “Guidance on Seeds, Annual Seed March 4. lings, and Planting Stock in Organic Crop Production,” Murphy, Kevin, et al. 2007. Evidence of varietal adaptation to organic farming systems, Navazio, J., Colquhoun, T., Waters, P.A., Roberts, J, Zystro, P.W., Simon, J., Colley, M., McCluskey, C., Hoagland, Agriculture) Organic for L., Improvement (Carrot CIOA duToit, The 2015. J. L., Nunez, Silva, E., and Project: Location, cropping system, and genetic background influence Acta Hort. carrot performance including top height and flavor. Ibid. Editors. 2009. “Do Seed Companies Control GM Crop Research?” entific American Bayh-Dole,” from “Lessons 2010. N. Bhaven Sampat, Ibid. Richard Joost. 2014. “What is the state of ment?” public Proceedings cultivar from develop the 2014 Summit on Seeds http://rafiusa.org/programs/just- at & accessed Agriculture, Breeds Century 21st for foods/2014-seeds-breeds-summit/. 11. March Tracy, Bill and Shelton Adrienne 2016. communication. Personal at accessed Gain,” Private Research, “Public 2012. Watch. Water & Food http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/insight/public-research-private-gain. https://www.ota.com/news/press-releases/18061. https://www.ota.com/news/press-releases/18061. du Toit, L.J. 2007. “Crop Profile for Cabbage Seed USDA in Pest Washington,” Management Centers, accessed at http://www.ipmcenters. org/cropprofiles/docs/WAcabbageseed2007.pdf. USDA-NIFA. Current Research Information System, accessed at http:// cris.nifa.usda.gov/. Carter, T., William F. Tracy, Thomas R. Sinclair, Thomas G. Isleib, and Organic Trade Association. 2015. “U.S. consumers across the country devour record amount of organic in 2014,” April 15, accessed at

14. 15. 13. 9. 10. 11. 12. 5. 6. 7. 8. 3. 4.

1. 2. References

References 72 Appendix A

Appendix A.1: Organic seed research investment methods

To locate public organic seed and breeding initiatives, we examined lists and databases of the following programs and foundations: the USDA Organic Research and Education Initiative (began as IOP and became OREI), USDA Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI), the USDA Sustainable Research and Education program (SARE), the federal Risk Management Agency (RMA), the USDA Value Added Producer Grants program (VAPG), and federal and state Specialty Crop Grants. Additionally, we searched the USDA Current Research Information System (CRIS) for projects outside of the above listed programs. We also searched the funding records of the following foundations, trusts, and funds: the Organic Farming Research Foundation (OFRF), the Farmers Assisting Farmers Fund (FAFO), Ceres Trust, Seed Matters Initiative (Clif Bar Family Foundation), Columbia Foundation, and Gaia Fund.

Search terms included “organic” combined with “trial,” “breed,” “seed,” “variety,” “cultivar,” or “germplasm.”

Project funding was divided in six ways: by year, by funding source, by project type, by crop type, by region, and by project budget. When calculating funding for multi-year projects, we considered total funding to be evenly distributed into all of the years in the project’s term. Funding sources were divided into six categories: USDA-OREI, SARE, other federal funds, CERES Trust, Clif Bar Family Foundation, FAFO, OFRF, and other Non-Federal Funds. The projects were split by topic into breeding/ variety trials, enterprise development, seed production research and education, policy and systems development, and multi-topic. Projects were also split into eight regional categories: Midwest, Northeast, Northern Plains, Pacifc Northwest, Southeast, Southern Plains, Southwest, and multi-region. Projects were divided by crop type into corn, legumes, potato, vegetables, wheat, multiple feld crops, multiple small grains, multiple, and other. Some projects that involved wheat were included in the multiple small grains category, and some projects that involved corn were included in the multiple feld crops. Finally, project were divided into categories based on total project budget as follows: less than $5,000, $5,000 - $10,000, $10,000 - $50,000, $50,000 - $100,000, and more than $100,000. State of Organic Seed, 2016

NT NG i u ND MO Fu A $33,000 $1,450,922 $50,000 $18,881 $1,923,538 $9,963 $10,000 $10,000 $14,815 $14,177 $12,880 $4,022 $939,954 $793,724 $1,262,855 $34,830 $47,200 $1,603,653 $387,969 $345,279 $75,000 $11,200 $125,000 $48,153 $125,000 $2,097,770 $125,000 RCE u O S OREI OREI FAFO SARE OREI SARE CERES Trust CERES Trust OFRF OFRF OFRF SARE OREI OREI OREI OFRF OFRF OREI OREI Other Federal Funds FAFO OFRF Clif Bar Family Foundation SARE Clif Bar Family Foundation OREI Clif Bar Family Foundation Clif Bar Family Foundation ) S ( 2014 2010 2010 2010 2013 2012 yEAR 2014 - 2015 2011 - 2014 2013 - 2014 2013 - 2014 2010 - 2014 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2014 2011 - 2013 2010 - 2013 2012 - 2015 2011 - 2014 2011 - 2014 2012 - 2016 2010 - 2012 2010 - 2011 2013 - 2018 2012 - 2014 2012 - 2017 2011 - 2015 2012 - 2017 2011 - 2015 ON i AT iz ORGAN

ENT reeding / Variety Trials b ipi EC R Agriculture Society Farm Breeding Club Oregon State University University of Wisconsin - Madison - Wisconsin of University Madison - Wisconsin of University Organic Seed Alliance University of Minnesota - Agronomy & Plant Genetics Organic University State Kentucky Agriculture Working Group Northern Plains Sustainable Twin Oaks Seed Farm Organic Seed Alliance Green Dragon Farm North Carolina State University - Crop Science Washington State University Washington State University University of Nebraska - Agronomy & Horticulture Washington State University - Crop & Soil Sciences Lubbock - TAMU Agr Res Cntr TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY North Carolina State University - Crop Science Lupine Knoll Farm Center Dickinson Research Extension Washington State University - Crop & Soil Sciences University of Tennessee Madison - Wisconsin of University Agricultural Research Service Cropping Systems Coordinated Agricultural Project Washington State University Washington State University Puyallup Washington State University - NAME

ECT j pRO New Buckwheat Varieties For Greater Sustainability Northern Organic Vegetable Improvement Collaborative (NOVIC) Identifying Potato Varieties with Increased Levels of Mature Plant Resistance to Potato Virus Y for Improved Organic Seed Potato Production Identifying Priorities and Opportunities to Advance Organic Plant Breeding in the Pacific Northwest Improving Soybean and Dry Bean Varieties and Rhizobia for Organic Systems Mideast Organic Corn Variety Trial Identifying Heirloom and Specialty Varieties Resistant to Silver Scarf Disease for Organic Potato Production Identifying and Marketing Quality Open-Pollinated and Organic Cucurbit Seedstocks for Virginia Four Organic Breeding Guides: An Introduction to Organic Breeding; and Organic Breeding for Sweet Corn, Carrots, and Tomatoes Farmer Driven Breeding: Addressing the Needs of Farmer Driven Breeding: Addressing the Needs of Southeastern Organic Field Crop Producers Farmer-Based Evolutionary Participatory Plant Breeding for Organic Quinoa, Buckwheat, and Spelt Evaluation of the Insect Resistance of Interspecific Evaluation of the Insect Resistance of Interspecific Squash Hybrids Evaluation of Day-Neutral Strawberries Developing Wheat Varieties for Organic Agricultural Systems Organic Agricultural Developing Wheat Varieties for Development of Cultivars and IPM Strategies for Organic Cotton Production Creation of Two Open-Pollinated, Sugary Enhanced Creation of Two Open-Pollinated, Sugary Enhanced Sweet Corn Varieties Developing "Organic-Ready" Maize Populations with Gametophytic Incompatibility Management Optimal and Varieties Adapted Developing Practices for Quinoa in Diverse Environments Developing Small Grains Cultivars and Systems Optimally Suited for Organic Production Creating an Organic Plant Breeding Center Breeding Sweet Corn for Organic Farming Systems Breeding Sweet Corn for Added Carrot Improvement for Organic Agriculture with Grower and Consumer Value Climate Change, Mitigation, and Adaptation in Corn- Based Cropping Systems Breeding New Organic Oat and Wheat Varieties to Breeding New Organic Oat Performance in Enhance Economic and Environmental Western Washington to Resist GMO Contamination Breeding Organic Corn Varieties Barley and Alternative Crop Breeding Program in Barley and Alternative Crop Washington State Cultivars for Organic Breeding Day-Neutral Strawberry Northwest Production in the Pacific Appendix A.2: Organic seed research projects seed research A.2: Organic Appendix

Appendix A 74 Northern Organic Vegetable Improvement Collaborative Oregon State University 2014 - 2018 OREI $1,997,986 (NOVIC) II On-Farm Organic Soybean Variety Trials Michigan State University Extension 2012 - 2014 SARE $199,153 Open Source Carrots University of Wisconsin - Madison 2014 CERES Trust $9,981 Organic Barley Breeding Washington State University 2012 - 2017 Clif Bar Family Foundation $125,000 Organic Breeding for Late Blight Resistance in Tomatoes Oregon State University 2012 - 2017 Clif Bar Family Foundation $125,000 Organic Brussels Sprouts in The Northeast: Variety, Blue Heron Farm 2011 - 2013 SARE $6,134 Pest Control, and Storage Trials Organic Corn Varieties to Resist Contamination from North Carolina State University 2013 - 2018 Clif Bar Family Foundation $125,000 Genetically Engineered Corn Pollen Organic Cotton Breeding Texas A&M AgriLife Research 2013 - 2018 Clif Bar Family Foundation $125,000 Organic Crop Cultivar Selection for Great Plains States North Dakota State University 2010 - 2012 CERES Trust $156,096 in the North Central Region Organic Dry Bean Breeding UC Davis 2014 Clif Bar Family Foundation $36,000 Organic Food Barley: Developing Nutritious and Washington State University 2014 OFRF $15,000 Delicious Varieties for the Pacific Northwest Organic Participatory Plant Breeding Toolkit: Tools Organic Seed Alliance 2011 OFRF $12,021 & Training in Participatory Breeding Projects for Researchers and Organic Farmers Organic Potato Variety Trial in Michigan's Upper Peninsula Wixtrom Natural Farms 2013 SARE $2,246 Organic Vegetable Breeding Oregon State University 2012 Clif Bar Family Foundation $25,000 Participatory Development of an Open Pollinated Early University of Wisconsin 2013 - 2014 CERES Trust $9,996 Maturating Sweet Corn for Organic Production Participatory Screening of Broccoli Varieties for NCSU Mountain Horticultural Crops 2011 - 2014 CERES Trust $59,147 Organic Systems in Western NC Research and Extension Center Participatory Variety Trials for Flavor, Quality and University of Wisconsin - Madison 2014 CERES Trust $10,000 Agronomic Performance to Increase Direct-Market Opportunities and On-Farm Trialing Capacity for Organic Growers Plant Breeding and Agronomic Research for Organic Washington State University - 2010 - 2013 OREI $328,062 Hop Production Systems Crop & Soil Sciences Practical Approach to Controlling Foliar Pathogens Purdue University 2014 - 2018 OREI $1,987,150 in Organic Tomato Production Through Participatory Breeding and Integrated Pest Mgmt Practical Perennials: Partnering with Farmers to Michigan State University 2010 - 2013 OREI $839,739 Develop a New Type of Wheat Crop Quinoa Trial for Northeast Upland Farms Maplebank Farm 2012 SARE $9,370 Selecting For Resilience In Low-Input Potato Cropping University of Wisconsin - Madison 2012 - 2014 SARE $190,512 Systems: Connecting Farmers And Breeders With The Genetic Resources Of An Underutilized Potato Germplasm Collection Snap Beans with Enhanced Nitrogen-Use Efficiency for University of Wisconsin - Madison 2012 - 2013 OFRF $14,224 Organic Production Strengthening Public Corn Breeding to Ensure Organic Agricultural Research Service 2010 - 2014 OREI $2,864,478 Farmers' Access to Elite Cultivars Tasting/Networking and Seed Access for Four Key Crops Organic Seed Alliance 2013 Other Federal Funds $64,246 Value-Added Grains for Local and Regional Food Systems Cornell University 2011 - 2015 OREI $2,356,999 Washington State University Graduate Fellowship Washington State University - Pullman 2013 Clif Bar Family Foundation $25,000 Washington State University Graduate Fellowship Washington State University - 2013 Clif Bar Family Foundation $56,250 State of Organic Seed, 2016 Mt. Vernon policy and Systems Development Advocating for the Future of Organic Agriculture and Rural Advancement 2013 FAFO $30,000 Crop Diversity Foundation International Farmer Seed Stewards Program Organic Seed Alliance 2012 Clif Bar Family Foundation $45,000 Organic Carrots and Impact of Patents on Plant University of Wisconsin - Madison 2013 - 2018 Clif Bar Family Foundation $125,000 Genetic Diversity 75 Organic Seed Alliance - Advocacy Organic Seed Alliance 2012 - 2014 FAFO $75,000 Organic Seed Working Groups Organic Seed Alliance 2011 FAFO $27,000 $51,560 $15,000 $141,000 $9,584 $9,195 $76,712 $23,141 $13,000 $17,912 $5,000 $5,000 $14,940 $40,000 $14,376 $2,000 $82,063 $199,776 $50,000 $30,000 $25,000 $8,906 $23,200 $196,743 $6,000 $70,610 $199,106 $60,000 $42,951 Clif Bar Family Foundation FAFO Other Federal Funds CERES Trust OFRF SARE OREI OFRF SARE FAFO Other Federal Funds SARE Clif Bar Family Foundation Clif Bar Family Foundation OFRF Clif Bar Family Foundation Clif Bar Family Foundation Other Federal Funds SARE Other Non-Federal Funds Other Non-Federal Funds Clif Bar Family Foundation Clif Bar Family Foundation OFRF Other Non-Federal Funds SARE Clif Bar Family Foundation Clif Bar Family Foundation SARE Other Non-Federal Funds OREI 2013 2012 2012 2013 2010 2013 2010 2014 2014 2012 2012 2014 2014 2013 2011 - 2012 2010 - 2012 2010 - 2012 2013 - 2014 2013 - 2014 2012 - 2013 2011 - 2012 2010 - 2011 2012 - 2015 2011 - 2014 2011 - 2013 2014 - 2016 2013 - 2014 2014 - 2015 Multi-Topic roduction Research and Education roduction Research p Seed Savers Exchange University of Wisconsin - Madison - Wisconsin of University Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation Organic Seed Alliance Greenbank Farm Berry Farm North East OrganicFarming Association Organic Seed Alliance Hudson Valley Seed Library Oregon State University Organic Seed Alliance Northern Plains Sustainable Agriculture Society The Rodale Institute Chickadee Farm RAFI Organic Seed Alliance Organic Seed Alliance Richmond Grows Seed Lending Library Richmond Grows Seed Lending OFRF University of Wisconsin - Madison - Wisconsin of University Organic Seed Alliance Organic Seed Alliance Cornell University Native Seeds/SEARCH Organic Seed Alliance Honeyhill Farm Organic Seed Alliance Organic Seed Madison - Wisconsin of University Seed The Community Seed Resource Program Pollinator Conservation Strategies for Organic Seed Producers Conservation Strategies for Pollinator Perceptions and Use of Organic Seed and Varieties by Perceptions and Use of Organic Seed and Varieties Midwestern Organic Vegetable Growers Capacity Through Shared Learning Around Research, Capacity Through Shared Learning Around Research, Development, Production and Marketing Organic Seed, Soils, and Sustainable Business: Three Organic Seed, Soils, and Sustainable Business: Three Intensives and an Online Tutorial Organic Seed: Increasing Regional Organic Farming Crop Populations and Screening Sorghum Varieties for Crop Populations and Screening Sorghum Varieties Organic Cover Crop Performance, Forage, and Seed Production in the Northern Great Plains Region Organic Seed Production and Improvement Training Program for Vermont Optimizing Sorghum-Sudan/Forage Soybean Cover Optimizing Sorghum-Sudan/Forage Soybean Cover The Seed We Need - Working Group, Symposium, and Action Plan for the Advancement of Organic Seed Systems Improving Seed Quality of Northeast-Grown Seed: Improving Seed Quality of Northeast-Grown Seed: Focus on Disease Managing Indigenous Seed-Inhabiting Microbes for Corn Biological Control Against Fusarium Pathogens in The Seed We Need - Working Group, Symposium, and Action Plan for the Advancement of Organic Seed Systems Feasibility of Small-Scale Certified Organic Seed Production, Marketing, and Sales Cowpea and Forage Radish Cover Crop Seed for Cowpea and Forage Radish Cover Crop Seed for Northern Climates Effect of Compost Extracts on Organic Seed Germination and Reduction of Weed Seed Expression Seeds and Breeds Conference Strengthening the Organic Seed System in California Climatic Risk Management Publication and Trainings Climatic Risk Management Publication and Trainings - for Organic and Specialty Vegetable Seed Producers Including Hispanic Producers Save Seed Sharing Campaign/Richmond Grows Seed Library Save Seed Sharing Campaign/Richmond Farm-Based Selection and Seed Production or Varieties of Bread Wheat, Spelt, Emmer, and Einkorn Adapted to Organic Systems in the Northeast Native Seeds/SEARCH - Creating a Robust and Healthy Food System Organic Seed Alliance Seed Matters Building Resilience and Flexibility into Midwest Organic Potato Production: Participatory Breeding and Seed Potato Production Development a Healthy Regional Sustainable Seed System in Northern California Development of Sustainable Seed Systems in Northern California Free from the Production of Garlic Bulbils? Free from the Production Can Organic Garlic Seed Stock be Created Disease- Can Organic Garlic Seed Planning for Organic Plant Breeding and Seed Organic Plant Breeding Planning for the Southeast Production in Public Plant Breeding Survey

Appendix A 76 Appendix A.3: Survey questions for principal investigators of research projects

1. What was the name of your project?

2. Please describe any successes, including tangible results, coming out of your project.

3. Please describe any obstacles you faced in meeting the goals of your project.

4. Did the project lack resources – physical, technical, or intellectual – that it could have benefted from? If so, which resources and how might the project have benefted from them?

5. Did farmers or other stakeholders (from the food, agriculture, or research communities) contribute to your project? Yes / No

6. If so, which stakeholders?

7. In what ways did they contribute (e.g., design, execution, evaluation, other)?

8. Was their involvement helpful? How?

9. Was their level of involvement more or less than you had anticipated? More / Less / About what I anticipated

10. If their involvement was different than expected, what factors do you think might have contributed to this? Comments

11. If your project focused on plant breeding, were any fnished varieties or breeding material released as part of this project? Yes / No

12. If varieties or breeding material was released, describe any mechanisms that were used to protect them (e.g., PVPs, MTAs, utility patents, OSSI pledge, etc).

13. What was the largest source of funding for this project?

14. List any other sources of funding. Comments

15. Were you able to use earned revenue (from variety releases or otherwise) to help fund this work? Yes / No

16. Has this project resulted in any new organic breeding or seed projects? Yes / No State of Organic Seed, 2016 17. If so, please describe any new projects that have come out of this project.

77 percent percent of

to retail seed companies __%

wholesale

____ Conventional un-treated seed ____ Conventional treated seed ____ Conventional traits seed with biotech ____ Conventional ____ Certifed organic seed ____ Certifed biodynamic seed ____ Potatoes, garlic or other vegetative propagules garlic or other vegetative ____ Potatoes, and perennials ____ Ornamentals fowers annual including 4. Which type of seed do you work with? Please check ALL Please that note apply. that “conventional” in this case means not certifed organic. ____ Cotton ____ Wheat small grains and crops and/or cover ____ Forage corn) (includes sweet vegetables market ____ Fresh for canning and processing ____ Vegetables 3. What crop categories attempt do to you serve? Please rank ALL that apply with to 1 you as the most important, 2 these blank. DO NOT rank categoriesas second most important, do not serve that you etc. – leave ____ Field corn (feed or processing) ____ Soybeans __ We produce seed and sell __ We to retail seed companies for production __% and license them breed varieties __ We sell retail to farmers __% __ We sell retail to gardeners __% __ We ____ Regional ____ National ____ International 2. Which best describes your business? Check all Ifthat apply. more than please one estimate apply, the that market. business focused on

Appendix B.1: Seed company survey questions survey B.1: Seed company Appendix geographic that best applies: Select ONE reach? 1. What term company’s defnes your Appendix B Appendix

Appendix B 78 5. What is the range of your gross annual seed-related revenue? Select the range that best applies.

___ Under $100,000 ___ $100,000-249,999 ___ $250,000-499,999 ___ $500,000-999,999 ___ $1 million-2.5 million ___ Over $2.5 million

6. Based on gross annual sales, please list the approximate percentage of your seed sourcing using the following categories (all categories should add up to 100%).

___ Self-produced ___ Produced under contract ___ Purchased wholesale ___ Other (fll in): ______

7. Over the past 5 years, how has your gross revenue changed? Select the range that best applies.

___ Increased over 20% year over year ___ Increased 6-20% year over year ___ Increased 1-5% year over year ___ Remained close to constant (between -1% and 1% change year over year) ___ Decreased 1-5% year over year ___ Decreased 6% or more year over year

8. What do you see as the major barriers to growth for your business?

9. What percentage of your gross annual seed-related revenue is from certifed organic seed products? Please indicate percentage 0-100. ______

10. Over the past 5 years, how has percentage of gross annual seed-related revenue from certifed organic seed products changed? Select the range that best applies.

___ Increased over 20% year over year ___ Increased 6-20% year over year

___ Increased 1-5% year over year State of Organic Seed, 2016 ___ Remained close to constant (between -1% and 1% change year over year) ___ Decreased 1-5% year over year ___ Decreased 6% or more year over year

11. What do you see as the major barriers to increasing organic seed sales as part of your business? 79

12. What have been the greatest production challenges for your business? 22. If are not participating you please explain why. in Organic Finder, Seed about Organic23. Any additional comments or feedback Seed Finder? resource for the organic Organic community? believe Seed Finder is a valuable 20. Do you 21. If you participate in Organic Seed explain. please Finder, are there aspects of the website that can be improved? If yes, 18. What are the highest priority actions or projects that the organic seed community (private companies, universities, universities, companies, (private community organicseed the that projects or actions priority highest the are What 18. years? undertake the organic to build the next fve seed industrynon-profts) should collectively over the over undertake should Alliance Seed Organic believe you that projects or actions priority highest the are What 19. years to support the organicnext fve seed industry? 15. Whatare some examples of or successes relating to economics? solutions been the greatest16. What policy or legal business? have challenges for your 17. Whatare some examples of law? or successes relating to policy or solutions 13. What examples of are some production? relating to solutions or successes been the greatest business? for your 14. What economic challenges have

Appendix B 80 Appendix C

Appendix C.1: Certifier survey questions

1. Organic seed is gaining acceptance in the market. ___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___ Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree ___ Not sure Comments:

2. Stronger organic seed regulations are not needed at this time. ___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___ Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree ___ Not sure Comments:

3. Most organic growers make a greater effort to fnd organic seed than simply referring to three catalogs/sources. ___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___ Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree ___ Not sure Comments:

4. It is feasible for Accredited Certifying Agents (ACAs) to collect suffcient data from their clients to evaluate the commercial availability of organic seed. ___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___ Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree ___ Not sure State of Organic Seed, 2016 Comments:

81 - ___ Not sure Comments: ___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___ Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree ___ Not sure Comments: farmerperspective. the from issues seed understand to training additional need reviewers certifcation and Inspectors 8. published published in March of 2013, makes it easier to for determineACAs when seed can be categorized as commer cially unavailable. ___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___ Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree ___ Not sure Comments: 7. The NOP’s guidance document, “Seeds, Annual Seedlings, and Planting Stock in Organic Crop Production,” 6. Additional educational materials and outreach for organic farmers, such as access to organic variety trial data, would would data, trial variety organic to access as such farmers, organic for outreach and materials educational Additional 6. increase usage of organic seed. ___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree ___ Neutral ___ Neutral ___ Agree ___ Strongly agree ___ Not sure Comments: 5. It is feasible for ACAs to evaluate equivalent varieties when their clients claimed they were unable to organic seed. source ___ Strongly disagree ___ Disagree

Appendix C 82 9. To the best of your knowledge, please list any trends in exemptions for organic VEGETABLE CROP seed for the past three years. (For example, if you have noticed frequent exemptions for a particular crop type,such as sweet corn, list that here. These trends, if only anecdotal, help us understand gaps in organic seed availability.) Comments:

10. To the best of your knowledge, for the past three years, the demand for exemptions for organic VEGETABLE seed has: ___ Increased ___ Stayed the same ___ Decreased

11. To the best of your knowledge, please list any trends in exemptions for organic FIELD CROP seed for the past three years: Comments:

12. To the best of your knowledge, for the past three years, the demand for exemptions for organic FIELD CROP seed has: ___ Increased ___ Stayed the same ___ Decreased

13. Please share what you believe are the most common reasons your clients ask for an exemption on organic seed for VEGETABLE crops. Not a factor/ Slight factor / Moderate factor / More than moderate factor / Signifcant factor ___ Specifc variety not available in a certifed organic form ___ Insuffcient quantity of seed ___ Processor (buyer) demands varieties in contract that are not available organically ___ Save their own seed ___ Distrust of organic seed quality ___ Seed sizing ___ Lack of seed treatments, such as pelleting or priming ___ Lack of desirable genetic traits ___ Price is too high Please specify any additional reasons and rate their signifcance. State of Organic Seed, 2016

83 . ___ Other: Comments: purchased? seed actual is approved seed ensure to ofclients ofyour invoices reviews seed random conduct you Do 20. ___ Yes ___ No ___ No Comments: ofinspection visual is experience, your In determine19. to adequate if seed applied? been has treatment or coating a ___ Yes ___ No ___ No Comments: inspect seed? physically ever inspectors 18. Do your ___ Yes please explain here: Comments: 17. Do your inspectors ever physically inspect seed labels process? review and match them to the seed lot invoices during your ___ Yes ___ Yes ___ No If the reason for the denial? Please specify here: know do you yes, answered you of issue exemptions, the on seed organic offer to insight other any if or have trends other you noticed If 16. have you ___ Lack of___ Lack priming as pelleting or such seed treatments, of___ Lack desirable genetic traits ___ Price is too high and rate their signifcance Please specify any additional reasons requested but denied? was situation where an organic encountered a you seed exemption 15. Have ___ Insuffcient quantity of___ Insuffcient quantity seed organically contract that are not available in demands varieties ___ Processor (buyer) seed their own ___ Save ___ Distrust of organic seed quality ___ Seed sizing 14. Please share what you believe are the most common reasons your clients ask for an exemption on organic seed for FIELD CROPS. factor / Moderate factor / MoreNot a factor / Slight / Signifcant factor than moderate factor in a certifed organic not available form___ Specifc variety

Appendix C 84 21. Have you strengthened your policies and procedures regarding organic seed over the last three years? If yes, please mark all relevant options below and/or explain under “other” below. ___ No, we haven’t strengthened our policies and procedures regarding organic seed ___ Yes, we have required operations we certify to (please check all options below that apply): ___ Conduct trials of available organic varieties ___ Search the Organic Seed Finder website ___ Research more than three seed catalogues ___ Request seed in a timely manner ___ Contract organic seed production ___ Other (please specify below)

22. If you were to recommend resources to certifed operations for identifying organic seed availability, where would you point them? (Check all that apply.) ___ Organic Seed Finder ___ FarmsReach seed sourcing tool ___ PickACarrot.org ___ NCAT/ATTRA organic seed listings

23. May we contact you with follow-up questions? If so, please provide your contact information below. (Your information will not be shared or added to email lists.) Name Company Email Address Phone Number State of Organic Seed, 2016

85 - - -

New Hampshire Department of Agriculture Northeast Organic Farming Association (NOFA) (OFARM) Organic Farmers' Agency for Relationship Marketing Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association Oregon Department of Agriculture Oregon Tilth Organic Farming Research Foundation Organically Grown Company Organic Seed Alliance Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture Practical Farmers of Iowa Quality Certification Services Rural Advancement Foundation International Tilth Producers of Washington Vermont Organic Farmers Midwest Organic Farmers Cooperative Midwest Organic Services Association Agriculture Montana Department of Monterey County Certified Organics National Organic Coalition Nevada Department of Agriculture Ecocert ICO, LLC Ecological Farming Association Georgia Organic Horizon Organic International Certification Services, Inc. International Organic Inspectors Association Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service California Certified Organic Farmers Carolina Farm Stewardship Association Department of Plant and Industry, Clemson University

the survey, and made individual phone calls. phone calls. and made individual the survey, from the National Organic list Program’s of certifed included operations. demographWe a similar had random lists partners’sample our and in our analysis be OSA’s on producers responding the that sure make to wanted we cause ics and opinions as the broader population of organic producers. In our sample group we made an effort to high response rate just to hear ensure getfrom that only didn’t we the most passionate organica producers in our sample ofcopies paper mailed emails, follow-up three sent surveyinitial the we them request, emailing to addition In group. In addition to distributing the survey through partners, we also contacted a random sample ofsample selected random producers a 800 contacted also we partners, through survey the distributing to addition In Table 1. Organizations that distributed the organic farmer 1. Organizations response. at least one seed survey and received Table the average the responseaverage time be 15 Ifminutes or less. the exclude we 55 respondents hourswho two took(assuming over response14 onminutes. it) thetime actual was average that they leftworking the survey not actively open but were Surveysan online were disseminated surveyelectronically via SurveyMonkey, tool, and when necessary in paper for throughout cooperatives and associations, farm regional and state agencies, certifcation list, email OSA’s through mat, 1 below). the US (see Table In creating the surveyinput from from received we representatives organic certifcationfarmer nonprofts, agencies, associations, individual producers, and the seed and conducted food a We industries. test run of the survey with 20 farmers into the fnal. and incorporatedand feedback their comments We restricted the number of questions to keep the time spent by each respondent relatively short. Our goal was to have

Appendix D.1: Farmer survey methods survey methods D.1: Farmer Appendix usage ofdemographics(2) farm respondents; (1) areas: four in informationget to designed were questions survey The of organic organic in using seed; (3) challenges and (4) the need/potential for organic seed; seed. Appendix D Appendix

Appendix D 86 The survey was open from June through December of 2014. During that time we received distinct responses from 1,365 certifed organic farmers. According to USDA’s 2014 Organic Production Survey there are 12,595 certifed organic farms in the US. This includes farms that likely don’t use seed (all of their production is in fruit, livestock, or other) and as such the number of certifed organic farms using seed is under 12,000. Therefore we feel comfortable in claiming a response rate of 10% of the certifed organic farms in the country. We received responses from 203 out of the 800 producers in our random sample, providing a response rate of 25% within our sample group.

The summary of data in this report is generally based on averages from all respondents. We analyzed the results from the random sample group and found no signifcant differences in responses between the 203 respondents in the random sample group and the 1,365 respondents in the entire group.

Where possible, we included both results from the 2009 and 2014 surveys. Not all questions could be compared, however, because we didn’t include the question in one of the two surveys or because we asked the question in a different way.

The confdence intervals (error bars) in the results report the range that the true result would be expected to be in 95% of the time. In general, when there are fewer responses included in an average or percentage, the error is greater. This would happen either when we had fewer overall responses to a question or when we divided the responses into many categories with relatively few respondents in each category. The error can also be large when respondents provided very different answers from one another. The error bars can be used to determine how likely it is that the averages or percentages differ from one another; for example, the responses from 2009 and 2014, or the responses from large and small vegetable producers. If the error bars overlap, then we can’t be sure the averages or percentages are actually different.

When asking farmers for their “top 3” crops by acreage, we allowed them to write in a response. Some growers responded generally – “greens” and “tomatoes” – whereas others were specifc, such as “Romaine lettuce,” “collards,” and “paste tomatoes.” For the purpose of the summary within this report, we grouped responses into generalizations. State of Organic Seed, 2016

Figure 2. Respondent locations. Figure 2. Respondent

Appendix D.2: Farmer survey data D.2: Farmer Appendix been certifed you organic? have years many Figure How 1. Appendix D Appendix

Appendix D 88 Figure 3. Did you have any organic acres in annual vegetables last year?

Figure 4. How many organic acres did you have in annual vegetables last year?

Figure 5. What approximate percentage of total acreage of annual vegetables was planted with certifed organic seed last year? State of Organic Seed, 2016

89 Figure 8. Percent organic seed used for LETTUCE/GREENS — the #2 vegetable category. organic seed used for LETTUCE/GREENS — the #2 vegetable Figure 8. Percent Figure 7. Percent organic seed used for TOMATOES — the #1 vegetable category. — the #1 vegetable organic seed used for TOMATOES Figure 7. Percent Figure 6. Average percent vegetable acreageto organic seed. planted percent vegetable Figure 6. Average

Appendix D 90 Figure 9. Percent organic seed used for SQUASH — the #3 vegetable category.

2009 47%

2014 34%

12% 10%10% 8% 8% 7% 6% 6% 7% 7% 6% 6% 4% 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2%

0 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 91-99 Percentage of respondents 100 Percentage of organic seed used for squash

Figure 10. Did you have any organic acres in cover crops and/or green pasture last year?

Figure 11. How many organic acres did you have in annual cover crops and/or green pasture last year? State of Organic Seed, 2016

91 Percentage of acreage of Percentage Figure 14. Average percent organic seed used for top fve cover crops. cover percent organic seed used for top fve Figure 14. Average

Figure 13. Average percent cover crop/green pasture cover percent acreageFigure 13. Average planted to organic seed. Figure 12. What approximate percentage of total acreage of annual cropscover and/or green pasture was planted with certifed seed last year? organic

Appendix D 92 Figure 15. Did you have any organic acres in feld crops last year?

Figure 16. How many organic acres did you have in feld crops last year?

Figure 17. What approximate percentage of total acreage of feld crops was planted with certifed organic seed last year? State of Organic Seed, 2016

93 Figure 20. Percent organic seed used for SOYBEANS — the #2 feld crop category. organic seed used for SOYBEANS Figure 20. Percent Figure 19. Percent organic seed used for CORN — the #1 feld cropFigure category. 19. Percent Figure 18. Average percent feld crop percent feld acreageFigure 18. Average seed. planted to organic

Appendix D 94 Figure 21. Percent organic seed used for WHEAT — the #3 feld crop category.

Figure 22. Did you have any organic acres in forage crops last year?

Figure 23. How many organic acres did you have in forage crops last year? State of Organic Seed, 2016

95 Figure 26. Percent organic seed used for ALFALFA — the #1 forage crop category. organic seed used for ALFALFA Figure 26. Percent Figure 25. Average percent forageFigure 25. Average crop acreage planted to organic seed. Figure 24. What approximate percentage ofpercentage approximate What certifed24. organic ofacreageFigurewith total planted was cropsforage seed last year?

Appendix D 96 Figure 27. Percent organic seed used for CLOVER — the #2 forage crop category.

Figure 28. Percent organic seed used for GRASS — the #3 forage crop category.

Table 1. Over the last 3 years (2011-2013) have you decreased/increased the percentage of organic seed that you use in the following crop types?

Forage Cover crops/ Across all State of Organic Seed, 2016 Vegetables Field crops crops green manure crop types

Already at 100% 18% 30% 30% 29% 27%

Increased the percentage 46% 29% 25% 30% 31% 97 About the same percentage 31% 38% 42% 38% 36%

Decreased the percentage 5% 3% 3% 2% 6% Figure 30. Over the last three years has your certifer requested that you take greater steps to source organic seed? seed? organic source to steps greater take you that requested certifer your has years three last the Over 30. Figure Figure 29. Last year, what percentage what ofFigure 29. Last year, get from following sources? the did you seed your

Appendix D 98 Table 2. The reasons you have not purchased organic seed over the last three years (2011-2013).

Not a Slight Moderate Signifcant reason reason reason reason

Lack of seed treatments such as pelleting or priming 84% 8% 4% 4%

Buyer demands varieties not available organically 73% 6% 5% 16%

Insuffcient quantity of seed 44% 14% 18% 24%

Save my own seed 51% 12% 10% 28%

Distrust of organic seed quality 75% 12% 7% 6%

Price 59% 14% 13% 14%

Specifc variety not available 21% 8% 14% 56%

Lack of desirable genetic traits 49% 12% 15% 24%

Seed sizing 84% 8% 5% 3%

Confdence interval: <%3.5

Table 3. Organic seed quality issues over the last three years (2011-2013).

More than Not a Slight Moderate Severe moderate problem problem problem problem problem

Germination/emergence 51% (-1%) 23% (+6%) 16% (-0%) 7% (-3%) 3% (-0%)

Varietal integrity (i.e. not true to type) 65% (+2%) 19% (+3%) 10% (-1%) 4% (-3%) 2% (-2%)

Contamination with genetically engineered traits 88% 7% 3% 1% 1% State of Organic Seed, 2016 Physical appearance looks suboptimal 74% (+3%) 15% (-0%) 7% (-2%) 3% (-0%) 2% (-0%)

Excessive chaff and foreign matter 84% (+3%) 12% (-2%) 2% (-1%) 1% (-0%) 1% (+0%)

Seedbourne diseases 80% (+1%) 11% (+0%) 4% (-2%) 2% (+1%) 2% (+0%)

99 Uneven size for seeding equipment 80% (-2%) 13% (+2%) 4% (+1%) 2% (+1%) 1% (+0%)

Change from 2009 to 2014 in parentheses. Confdence intervals from ~0 to 3%. 0% -4% -5% -5% -2% -1% -1% Moderate to severe problem 5% 5% 2% 1% 1% 0% 4% slight problem Not a problem or Uneven size for seeding equipment Physical appearance looks suboptimal matter and foreign Excessive chaff Seedbourne diseases Germination/emergence integrity (i.e. not true to type) Varietal seed in seed lots Contamination by weed Figure 32. In general do you have more problems with seed quality issues in non-treated conventional seed more problems in non-treatedquality issues with seed conventional have Figuredo you In general 32. or organic seed? Figure certifer 31. Whichadditional steps has your requested? Table 4. Changes in organic seed quality issues between 2009 and 2014. 2009 and quality issues between in organic seed 4. Changes Table

Appendix D 100 Figure 33. Agree or disagree: I use my organic seed usage as part of my marketing.

Figure 34. Agree or disagree: I want my seed supplier farming in a similar system as mine.

Figure 35. Agree or disagree: I want my organic seed purchases to encourage organic breeding. State of Organic Seed, 2016

101 Figure 38. Agree or disagree: The federal regulations that oversee GE crop (GMOs) approvals are adequate are approvals (GMOs) crop GE oversee disagree:Agreethat or regulations38. Figure federal The for farm organic protecting my product(s) from potential contamination by GE crops (GMOs). Figure 37. Agree or disagree: Seed companies should conduct testing and report rates of GE (GMO) crop seed. contamination in organic and conventional Figure 36. Agree or disagree: is a requirement It of organic certifcation.

Appendix D 102 Figure 39. Agree or disagree: Organic seed is important to maintaining the integrity of organic food production.

Figure 40. Agree or disagree: Varieties bred for organic production are important to the overall success of organic agriculture. State of Organic Seed, 2016

103 TOTAL Cold Nutrient Disease Germination/ votes Appear- hardiness/ Competitiveness Maturity/ use Flavor Yield resistance/ seedling Quality Other for ance season with weeds earliness effciency tolerance vigor crop extension

227 22% 7% 4% 9% 58% 25% 34% 30% 15% 16% 10% Corn ±27 ±2% ±1% ±0% ±1% ±2% ±2% ±2% ±2% ±1% ±1% ±1%

119 10% 4% 2% 3% 66% 35% 22% 54% 11% 13% 9% Soybeans ±20 ±1% ±1% ±0% ±0% ±2% ±2% ±2% ±2% ±1% ±1% ±1%

91 31% 9% 2% 16% 45% 35% 20% 34% 7% 26% 11% Wheat ±18 ±2% ±1% ±0% ±1% ±2% ±2% ±1% ±2% ±1% ±2% ±1%

100 6% 30% 20% 14% 28% 80% 7% 3% 9% 18% 5% Tomatoes ±18 ±1% ±2% ±2% ±1% ±2% ±2% ±1% ±0% ±1% ±1% ±1%

84 15% 18% 33% 11% 38% 40% 14% 8% 15% 31% 12% Brassicas ±17 ±1% ±1% ±2% ±1% ±2% ±2% ±1% ±1% ±1% ±2% ±1%

49 4% 12% 18% 16% 39% 69% 8% 2% 10% 18% 10% Squash ±13 ±0% ±1% ±1% ±1% ±2% ±2% ±1% ±0% ±1% ±1% ±1% Table 5. Most important crops in need of and traits Table plant breeding. organic

Appendix D 104 Figure 41. Do you think that there are crops in need of organic plant breeding?

Figure 42. Which of the following categories best fts your situation pertaining to producing organic seed?

Figure 43. Have you ever produced organic seed commercially? State of Organic Seed, 2016

105 Figure 46. How interested are you in taking a training on producing interestedFigure organic seed for are 46. How commercial use? you Figure 45. What factors have kept you from producingFigure organic seed for you 45. What commercial use? kept factors have Figure 44. Are you interestedFigure in producing 44. Are seed for organic you the future? at some point in commercial use

Appendix D 106 Figure 47. Are you interested in conducting plant breeding (crop improvement) on your farm?

Figure 48. Number of respondents who produce specifc crop types.

Figure 49. Respondents by farm size. State of Organic Seed, 2016

107 Figure 52. Reasons rated moderate to signifcant forFigure not purchasing organic seed in the past. 52. Reasons Figure 51. Organic seed use by crop type and acreage. Figure 50. Overall percent acreageFigure 50. Overall seed by crop planted to organic and year. type

Appendix D 108 Figure 53. Seed quality problems rated moderate to severe.

Table 6. Over the last three years (2011-2013) have you decreased/increased the percentage of organic seed that you use in the following crop types?

Cover crops/green Vegetables Field crops Forage crops manure crops

Already at 100% 18% 30% 30% 29%

Increased the percentage 46% 29% 25% 30%

About the same percentage 31% 38% 42% 28%

Decreased the percentage 5% 3% 3% 2%

Figure 54. Over the last three years (2011-2013) have you decreased/increased the percentage of organic seed that you use in the following crop types? State of Organic Seed, 2016

109 organic seed over the last three (2011-2013). years organic seed over Figure 56. Reasons rated moderate to signifcant by feld crop producersofcroppurchasing feld not forby signifcant sizes to moderate various rated Reasons 56. Figure Figure 55. Reasons rated moderate to signifcant by vegetable producersofpurchasing not forvegetable by sizes signifcant to various moderate rated Reasons 55. Figure last three the (2011-2013). years organic seed over

Appendix D 110 Figure 57. Reasons rated moderate to signifcant by forage crop producers of various sizes for not purchasing organic seed in the past. State of Organic Seed, 2016

111 Appendix A 112