WASHINGTON - A court ruling favoring Monsanto Co. over a Canadian canola farmer is being heralded as an important victory for biotech companies trying to protect their patents on genetically modified crops.

But it is a victory that could carry a public-relations price: more concerns by farmers about big companies and the increasing use of genetically modified seeds.

In a case being watched around the world, a federal judge in Saskatchewan on Thursday ordered farmer Percy Schmeiser to pay damages to Monsanto after the company's genetically modified canola was found growing in his field.

Val Giddings, vice president of the 950-member Biotechnology Industry Association in Washington, said that the case underscores the sanctity of patents in a relatively new industry.

"It's clearly an important ruling for the industry in North America with potential implications and ripple effects throughout the world," he said.

Schmeiser thinks the ripples will in the long run prompt farmers to be more leery of the impact of the new technology.

"Monsanto might have won this battle, but I don't think they've won the war," he said.

Schmeiser, 70, a former mayor and provincial legislator, argued that the Roundup Ready canola developed by St. Louis-based Monsanto had sprouted from seeds that fell from passing trucks or had blown onto his land from neighbors' fields.

Judge W. Andrew MacKay expressed doubts about Schmeiser's contentions but did not rule directly about the source of the seeds. Nonetheless, he said that Schmeiser should have known that the canola growing on his land was one of Monsanto's patented varieties.

Schmeiser was ordered to reimburse Monsanto up to $105,000, based on his profits from the 1998 crop. He also was assessed damages of $15,450, an amount equivalent to the technology fees he would have been required to pay for planting the herbicide-tolerant seeds.

The award was viewed as less important than the signals that the case sent.

Ban on saving seeds

In many parts of the world, farmers are bridling under the requirements of paying the technology fees to plant genetically modified seeds and prohibitions against saving seeds from their modified crops for future plantings. Seed-saving is a common practice throughout the world, particularly in developing countries.

In 1998, Monsanto suspected Schmeiser of illegally planting patented seeds and hired private detectives to collect samples that were sent to St. Louis for testing.

The patents on genetically engineered seeds are necessary for companies to recoup their investments on products, said Trish Jordan, a spokeswoman for Monsanto Canada.

"We invest a significant amount of time and research into bringing new and innovative products into the marketplace," she said. "For us, this case was about patent protection. It was not about whether a gene transferred by pollen flow got a farmer hauled into court."

"Beyond their control"

Farmers in the United States and elsewhere are becoming increasingly worried about liability from wind-blown contamination from modified crops such as corn and canola. They have complained that the Agriculture Department has failed to consider liability from pollen while promoting biotech crops.

Leland Swenson, president of the 300,000-member National Farmers Union, based in Colorado, said that his organization had been awaiting the outcome of the Canadian case and was disturbed by the ruling.

"It says that farmers are going to be financially liable for acts of Mother Nature that are beyond their control," he said.

Swenson said that the court ruling suggests to him that farmers eventually will have to spend time determining what their neighbors are planting. "We have yet to face the ramifications of biotech's full usage and what it's going to bring about," he said.

Figures released Friday from the U.S. Department of Agriculture reflect the fears and hopes farmers have over the use of biotech crops. The agriculture department said genetically engineered corn seeds are expected to account for 24 percent of the corn crop this year, down from 25 percent last year. The dip follows revelations that a gene-altered variety of corn, known as StarLink, was found in the food supply without being cleared for human consumption.

But the use of biotech soybean and cotton seeds will climb, the agriculture department said. Sixty-three percent of the nation's soybean crop this year will be from genetically engineered seeds, up from 54 percent last year. And biotech cotton will account for 64 percent of this year's crop, up from 61 percent last year.

In Canada, where about 40 percent of 5 million acres of canola is genetically modified, Ernie Doerksen said that the Schmeiser ruling has generated a mixed reaction from farmers.

"There's certainly a fair degree of sympathy for Mr. Schmeiser, but farmers realize that if he would have won, they might not have had access to Monsanto's new technologies," said Doerksen, general manager of the Canadian Canola Growers Association.

Schmeiser is a former mayor of Bruno, in Saskatchewan, and a fifth-generation farmer who has grown canola for nearly 50 years. During his battle with Monsanto, he has become well-known not just in Canada but around the world as a self-styled victim of the new technology. Since being sued, he has made speeches in 20 countries as far away as India and Bangladesh, often at the invitation of farm groups opposed to the shift to genetically modified crops. Schmeiser was supposed to travel to South Africa this month to begin another speech-making trip, but that journey is in doubt while he weighs an appeal, he said.

Schmeiser has another distinction that has contributed to his folk-hero status in some quarters: He's an adventurer who has climbed Mount Kilimanjaro and attempted Mount Everest three times, almost reaching its summit.

In an interview from his farm, Schmeiser spoke defiantly about the ruling but said he has not decided whether to appeal. He continued to insist that he did not knowingly plant the modified seeds that got him in trouble.

"It's a terrible position that this case is putting farmers into, just unreal," he said. "I guess it's just tough luck if you get Monsanto seeds on your land. What about the property rights of farmers? The judge didn't address that.

"The law isn't made for individuals and regular people. I don't see how any person, any farmer can stand up to a multinational company in court," he said, putting his costs so far in defending himself at $200,000.

Lori Fisher, a Monsanto spokeswoman, said her company would prefer to handle patent infringement cases without litigation. She said that Monsanto has about 22 similar suits pending in the United States.

"The reason we take these kind of steps is to protect our patents first and, more importantly, to make sure that there is a level playing field for all of the other growers that are respecting the patent laws and deriving benefits from the technology," she said.

Reporter Bill Lambrecht:\E-mail:
blambrecht@post-dispatch.com\Phone: 202-298-6880

** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed for research and educational purposes only. **