Oregon Canola Saga 2.0 (2019 ed.)

Let’s start at the beginning…

Back in 2012 the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) threatened to abolish the longstanding canola exclusionary zone in the Willamette Valley. We fought back, with your help, to get legislation passed by the state which funded additional research and included a sunset clause on the canola restrictions in the valley. Here’s a good summary of why canola is problematic for specialty seed production and where we stood in the winter of 2013 from Oregon’s Agricultural Progress by Gail Wells, Canola In The Valley.

HB2427

Oregon HB2427 was passed by the Oregon Legislature in 2013 and the resulting research conducted by Oregon State University (OSU) was presented in 2017. It’s a whooping 105 pages and you can read the whole thing if you like here (the Executive Summary and Recommendations are pages 6-11 of the PDF). In the interest of getting to the point, here are the highlights.

Is canola uniquely problematic? OSU says No.

OSU researchers determined that under current cultural practices in the Willamette Valley there were no unique disease, pests, weed, or cross pollination problems associated with canola. Meaning that turnip and radish have just as many problems as canola and since we don’t currently regulate those crops, why would we limit or regulate canola specifically.

OSU Canola Genetics, Isolation, and Pinning Recommendations

• Canola should be treated the same as other Brassicaceae crops in relation to establishing isolation distances.
• Isolation is required between canola and other B. napus crops and B. rapa crops to maintain seed purity.
• No isolation is needed between canola and B. oleracea crops to maintain seed purity.
• Currently in Oregon, pinning Brassicaceae crops with the exception of canola is voluntary.

Aside: It’s time to mention that the specialty seed industry in the Willamette Valley operates under a voluntary self-regulating system through membership with the Willamette Valley Specialty Seed Association (WVSSA) which grants access and priority pinning to a private map held and operated by WVSSA. This is how we cooperatively prevent cross pollination among growers in the Willamette Valley. However, the Willamette Valley Oilseed Producers Association says they want nothing to do with that.

OSU Policy Recommendations

A few options are presented in the report varying around the details of acreage, voluntary regulation vs. legislative regulation, etc. But the important takeaways are that the researchers believe coexistence is possible AND that some sort of pinning procedure and maintaining isolation distances is critical. Directly from the report:

“None of the specific options is recommended over another, only that a pinning system is put in place that is transparent and provides equal access and treatment for all growers.”

Our 2¢

We don’t dispute OSU’s findings. However, just because canola isn’t worse than turnip or radish doesn’t mean we should lift the restrictions on it. Since permitting canola in the Willamette Valley would result in an increase of annual Brassicacea production acreage, you don’t have to be a pathologist to know that there will naturally be an increase in pest, disease, and weed pressure. And the vast majority of that increased pressure will be handled with chemical agricultural practices in the form of pesticides and herbicides. As small-scale, regional, organic specialty seed farmers we are on the fringe, already marginalized within the industry here in the Willamette Valley. As advocates for food justice, security, and biodiversity it’s easy for us to say that organic seed production for food crops takes obvious priority over oilseed. We don’t believe we need more oil, we need more organic seed produced for food.

The real question for us in all this is, and has always been, is this what we want for our future? Is this how we restore regional biodiversity and create food security? Is this encouraging agricultural practices that prevent climate change rather than subsidizing practices that increase it? Is this Bringing Biodiversity Back?

[And we haven’t even mentioned the elephant in the field: genetically engineered and herbicide tolerant canola.]

HB3382

Oregon HB3382 was passed by the Legislature in 2015 as a follow-up to HB2427. It required a literature review / case study of canola production in addition to the Willamette Valley research study funded in HB2427. It also required ODA to develop recommendations for coexistence of canola with other agricultural production in the Willamette Valley, and specified that those recommendations needed to provide adequate protections “to maintain the unique attributes of the specialty seed industry in this state.” ODA was to base its recommendations on the OSU findings/recommendations. ODA’s report to the Legislature was presented a year after OSU’s in autumn 2018. At only 9 pages it is considerably shorter and you can find it here. Again, some highlights…

A lot is simply quoting OSU’s report, summary of the industries at play, etc., etc. The key takeaway, and therefore big problem, is that ODA does not have the authority to require or maintain pinning guidelines or isolation distance between canola growers and specialty seed growers. As mentioned above, a transparent pinning and isolation process was the primary recommendation from OSU for (relative) peaceful, productive, nondestructive coexistence between producers. If ODA does not have this authority, how do we achieve this?

ODA’s mandate is to protect Oregon’s agriculture against pest and diseases, and NOT interfere in market viability. The Legislature did not change this and therefore left ODA with no authority in regards to requiring or mandating isolation distances or pinning. Their only move was to convene an advisory committee to discuss a new rule that provides coexistence. This committee met a handful of times this winter (2018-2019) and the resulting proposed rule change from ODA is now public. Needless to say (or why are we writing this?) it sucks. Especially for us and anyone who strives for organic specialty seed production.

ODA’s 2019 Proposed Rule

ODA released their proposed rule on Brassicacea production in the Willamette Valley at the end of April 2019, and announced a public hearing for May 29th. The public comment period on the proposed rule closes on June 21st. Keep in mind that the current canola restrictions come to an end on July 1st, giving the ODA only 5 business days to make any changes. It feels obvious to us that they’re asking for interjection by the Legislature.

The proposed rule creates a new Proposed Isolation Area (the pink shaded area in the map below) that supposedly will remain canola free. Although, interestingly the actual rule does not state this with clarity or certainty. This is what ODA has verbally stated they’ll do.

The proposed rule states that canola will now be permitted in all other areas of the Willamette Valley Protected District (green border in map below) as long as the grower applies for and receives a permit through ODA. All land outside of the Protected District is a general production area with no restrictions, permits, etc.

ODA’s 2019 Proposed Isolation Area is the shaded pink area. The green border represents ODA’s existing Willamette Valley Protected District. As you can see, Adaptive Seeds is WAY out of the zone with no protection. Link to full map.

The proposed rule also includes increased measures for preventing contamination through weed, disease, pest, crop rotation, transportation, etc., management for all Brassicacea grown in the Protected District.

And, that’s it. No details or guidelines as to what the permit process entails for canola growers. No mention of isolation requirements or pinning process. No clearly stated way of protecting growers from cross-pollination. No collaboration with WVSSA and the existing pinning or isolation guidelines. No clear prohibition on canola in the Proposed Isolation Area.

First, as you can see in the map Adaptive Seeds is so far from the Proposed Isolation Area that we feel rather threatened by all this. Apparently we, and many of our contract growers, are considered too small to be worthy of protection by ODA. Second, there is zero information in ODA’s proposed rule regarding the permit process which directly effects our operation. Third, we obviously had to attend the public hearing on May 29th since we had a whole lot of questions, complaints, and serious concerns.

Permit Bullshmit

On May 29th we headed to Salem and put democracy into action. There were SO many questions raised during the course of this hearing. The hearing opened with a Q&A and the answers and exchanges here just gave us more cause for concern. According to the representatives in attendance from ODA the permit process appears to be purely bureaucratic. There are no qualifiers or restrictions. If you apply for the permit and are located in the Protected District and not in the Isolation Area, then your permit will be approved. No.Questions.Asked. No consideration or confirmation for whether there’s an established specialty seed grower next door, or even an already approved canola permit next door. Let alone in the recommended 3 mile isolation required for varietal integrity. ODA was very clear that all permits would be approved as there are no guidelines for denial.

So, how are we supposed to know whether any of our neighbors in a 3 mile radius are planning on growing canola and contaminating our B. napus or B. rapa growouts this year? ODA’s answer to that question, was to call them and ask. Yep, you read that right.

Read Sarah’s full testimony here.

2019 Legislative Action

Since the ODA’s process has floundered and the only industry satisfied is the oilseed producers, a bill is currently in process with the Oregon Legislature. SB885 was introduced in February as a sort of Plan B and indeed we’re glad it’s there because we certainly need it. The bill keeps the current restrictions on canola within the Willamette Valley Protected District. These restrictions require canola growers to get a license from ODA, a cap of 500 acres, and require industry recommended isolation distances with specialty seed growers to be maintained. It’s basically just a renewal of the existing stalemate, set to expire in four more years in June of 2023 and we’ll likely just do this all over again [insert face palm emoji]. If passed, our understanding is that SB885 would override ODA’s proposed rule. There is a retroactive date in the bill set for July 1 so any canola planted will have to abide to the stipulations in this bill.

As of today, June 17th, SB885 was passed out of the Joint Committee on Ways and Means just this last Friday, June 14th. It will be on the Senate floor any day now and we are not certain it will pass.

Call to Action! What you can do to help!

Do you live in Oregon? Contact your Oregon representatives NOW!

Urge them to support and pass SB885. Tell them that this bill is necessary because ODA’s proposed rule does not protect specialty seed growers. Therefore current restrictions in the Willamette Valley Protected District should remain to protect Oregon’s specialty seed growers, and all of the farmers, gardeners and eaters who depend on the seed produced here for food security worldwide.

Again, the bill will be on the Senate floor any day now.

Do you care about seed? Submit a comment to ODA by June 21 at 5pm!

Via email: ssummers@oda.state.or.us

Or by mail: Sunny Summers, Oregon Department of Agriculture, 635 Capitol St. NE, Salem, OR 97301

Our suggested talking points for ODA:

• The proposed rule is insufficient because it does not require industry-recommended isolation distances between Brassicacea producers.
• It does not prohibit genetically engineered or herbicide resistant canola varieties.
• The burden of cross-pollination problems fall solely on the specialty seed industry.
• Oilseed producers are permitted to more or less grow as much as they want wherever they want outside of the Proposed Isolation Area.
• It threatens the viability of Oregon’s unique specialty seed industry that provides Brassicacea seed to farmers worldwide, in direct disregard for the mandate laid out in HB3382.
• It does not limit the amount of canola acreage to prevent an increase in the presence of Brassicacea specific diseases, pests, etc.
  

Thank You!

Additional resources, talking points, etc.:

• Friends of Family Farmers Canola Action
• Good Stuff NW
• ODA Canola Page