Pictured above are canola fields found in China. This is the same canola that is later converted into the oil we use to prevent our pancakes from sticking to the pan. Needless to say, Canola is in high demand. Though the golden landscape is striking and the oil provides a helpful kitchen aid, canola is causing conflict between farmers concerned about cross-contamination.
Imagine that you are the owner of a small organic farm with specialty seeds. You have been successful in growing crops for years but recently your yields have decreased due to an increase in pests. One of the reasons for the pest increase may be your neighboring farmer who grows canola as a rotation crop to prevent his crops from disease. Good for him but bad for you if your seed integrity decreases along with your crops. But then imagine you are on the opposing side as the organic grain farmer and you chose to use canola instead of pesticides. Who wins this argument?
Although canola can prevent pests and disease when grown accordingly, it can also cause cross-contamination with specialty seeds. What may be helpful to some can be devastating to others. Farmers are genuinely concerned about their crop integrity.
Leah Rodgers from Friends of Family Farmers explains that the Willamette valley is the ideal place to grow specialty seeds unlike other unregulated valleys. But this may change (Haugen).
Should specialty seeds be labeled as cross-pollinated? If so, how can we possibly regulate this? According to a 3-year study conducted by a researcher at Oregon State University, pollen has the potential to travel up to 5 miles from its point of origin (Haugen).
Just like the cross-contamination that can be caused by genetically modified foods, the canola contamination may pose a slippery slope. However, one side may have to take the fall. Unfortunately for the specialty seed farmers, they may have to back down. My guess is that the alternative to canola wouldn’t be much better. If farmers stop producing canola as a rotation crop would they potentially turn to harsher chemicals to evade pests? That sounds like a worse case scenario for specialty seed farmers. Because chemicals can leak into the air and water supplies which can be extremely hard to regulate.
The most obvious solution is that specialty seed farms and a canola farms should not be within close proximity as Oregon has proposed. But as I see it, years from now, farmers we will be competing for space in the Willamette Valley due to its optimal conditions. If there is no regulation, contamination may get out of hand. It’s also vital that farmers growing canola are not growing genetically modified versions, which poses the risk of more contamination.
The problem is that canola will not go out of style- especially in the biofuel industry. We also do not want to rely on importing canola from other countries because that means a larger carbon footprint. Even transporting from state to state is not as sustainable. And who knows if canola can contaminate crops while in transit.
Oregon may have a solution for this canoodling crop but it does not cover all of its bases. The plan proposed in 2013 banned farmers from growing canola more than two years in a row in a five-year period (Haugen). They have also allowed a limit of 2,500 acres of canola in the Willamette Valley with a 3-mile radius from specialty seed farms (Haugen). My fear is that the 3-mile boundary will not be enough to prevent cross-contamination, considering studies have shown canola may have a wider reach. What will farmers use to prevent pests if their rotation crop can only be allowed for 2 years? Oregon may have to face amendments to this plan in the future, lets hope both side will be happy!
Works Cited
Haugen, Stephanie. “Canola Debate Pits Biofuels against Seeds.” The Portland
Tribune. 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2014. <http://portlandtribune.com/fgnt/36-news/126554-canola-debate-pits-biofuels-against-seeds>.