flax conference call

[gregpet]

Seed growers get to charge whatever the market will bear since there will be a short supply. Who bears that cost T4? Might make up for any dumped certified seed by charging more for the 'good' seed.

So I still see the primary producer bearing all the costs since any certified seed dumped by the seed grower will be made up by charging the farmers more for the available seed.

[oneoff]

Its as simple as gregpet says. Nuff said on the points he makes.

As for t4's comment "3. How could the presence of FP967 (CDC Triffid) be at background levels in the many samples tested... unless breeder seed was contaminated? "
If anyone thinks they can do anything about "background levels" they may be attacking something that we just have to live with. That insinuates the battle of eradication is already lost.
When seed growers dump their excess supplies they are at their lowest option level. That is a commercial farmers best option for their highest return. If seed growers want to help out they will not take advantage of short seed supplies and thus raise their prices to what the market will bear. We'll see how this plays out, but right now; in my books seed growers are on the same page as Viterra, the Flax Council and European customers.

[terralex]

T4... I did listen closely to what was said. Obviously someone didn't pay enough attention to getting rid of all the Triffid. I am hoping they are going to do a better job ensuring that Mons and Normandy are taken off the market completely.

Pars... Bill during the phone call was the first one to talk about hitting back financially. Sometimes lawyers are a good thing.

[terralex]

Just a different thought on the whole issue.

What if this is just a natural mutation.

If my understanding is correct Triffid was resistant to a Group 2 herbicide. There is no shortage of info on Group 2 resistant Kochia. Clearfield Lentils are a result of a mutation in the lentil plant that makes if resistant to a Group 2 herbicide.

What if nature is just trying to make it's own version of Triffid.

[charliep]

Did anyone ask about getting the triffid genetic event registered
in Europe? If the genetic were registered, then it could considered
under the GE corn events in soybeans.

Only other, do the current tests for the triffid genetic event occur
at the gene marker level or are they testing for the actual genetic
material. The marker is based on genetic material from a bacteria
which occurs in nature. I have also heard comments both ways as
to whether the marker was used in canola. My understanding
(others have understood different) is the marker was used in
earlier canola varieties (not used today).

[checking]

I'm not a shorthand taker, but I believe from my notes taken that your second question may have been answered by the crop specialist. It was to the effect that it was a marker gene test. This test for the GMO event was considered as accurate as a herbicide test. He stated, no other GMO has this construct in it.

It was all Greek to me. Can anyone else recall what he said?

[bduke]

Terralex..... If the Bill to which you are referring was
defending his reason for withdrawing check off
funding, then believe me... I am no lawyer.

My opinion/rant on yesterday's conference call was
reflecting my disgust for lack of accountability
since this wreck was clearly identified. I was also
invited to present my thoughts by Linda Braun while
defending my reasons for requesting check off
refunding during a prior phone call.

The off loaded costs of market discounting, new
seed costs, and sample testing are unfair.... and
currently very damaging.

However,this precedent could easily establish the
ability to off load any future negative genetic
consequences on to farmers ...... and this is a most
dangerous moral hazard.

I worry where it may lead?..... Bill Duke

[cottonpicken]

At least the seed growers will get rich.

[TOM4CWB]

C.P.;

Since the GM is spread at background levels... seed growers could be most effected.

It appears CDC through admission of 2 varieties being contaminated... of present flax breeder stocks... over 10 years after the GM event was removed... proves a simple logical explanation of where these low level contamination events came from

The CSGA pedigreed seed guidelines for best practice... are for .05% on breeder and select varietial purity.

When we are now required to submit 2kg & test 240 grams... or very close to 40,000 seeds... out of my farms select lot of 1.5t 2009 production...

This is not .01%... especially if a quarter or half a seed... out of 40,000 seeds... can trigger a trace GM event. Any reaction... to the GM constrait at all... and seed growers are told they must dump their pedigreed seed. So the EU has told the CGC... they will accept .01%... but if my seed lot indicates the possibility of even .0001%... I am told I cannot sell my pedigreed seed. Again we are told... any trace minute level at all that shows on even 1 of the 4 60 grams... tested is now a positive GM event. As far as I can find out, there is no allowance for false positive retest in the protocol for pedigreed seed.

For commecial flax growers; the recomendation is 1 2KG sample for 5000bu. A negative result is reported if less than .01% is acheived, trace levels are ignored. Only 60 grams are tested on commercial grain testing.

Now please explain how pedigreed seed growers are exempt from this problem... when we are told we must conform to standards very many times more stringent than commercial production?

[cottonpicken]

**** you,we all know how little triffid there is,and certfied flax seed is now god knows how valuable,go sell your spin to someone who is retarded.