Anna and Jason Scharf in a field of canola at their farm near Amity, Ore. They and other canola growers hope restrictions on the crop will be allowed to sunset next year.

Genetic engineering continues to fuel controversy as Oregon’s canola policy debate returns to the Legislature, though farmers say they’re near consensus on other regulatory questions.

Since mid-2023, lawmakers and regulators have overseen negotiations among growers over a potential framework for coexistence between canola and related seed crops.

While the work group couldn’t manage to hammer out a consensus bill, it did flesh out a basic regulatory structure that’s now being considered by lawmakers as House Bill 4059.

“If there’s any chance for moving forward this session, the core elements are there,” said Rep. Ken Helm, D-Beaverton, referring to a recent version of the proposal.

The discussion among farmers was required under legislation passed last year that extended for another year the 500-acre limit on canola in the Willamette Valley, a decade-old measure meant to prevent cross-pollination with other Brassica species.

Compromise reached

Though they’re now proposing dueling amendments to HB 4059 with differing approaches to genetic engineering, canola farmers and specialty seed producers say the talks were productive and resulted in a compromise on the fundamental regulatory scheme.

“There was a lot of agreement, and I feel like the majority of this bill does provide the access and equitable system to make it a real step forward toward a lasting solution, which I feel like we all want,” said Kathy Hadley, who grows canola and other crops near Rickreall, Ore.

Under both versions, anyone growing Brassica species for seed would need to register with the Oregon Department of Agriculture and abide by isolation distances intended to avoid gene flow between canola and specialty vegetable crops.

Farmers can reach agreements to waive the isolation distances and grow Brassica seed fields within a closer proximity. Deadlocks would be resolved by ODA, which would also potentially contract for a pinning map to enable compliance. The maximum acreage for canola planting would rise to 2,500 acres this year and then be eliminated in April 2025.

Under the amendment preferred by organic and conventional specialty seed producers, however, genetically engineered varieties would be subject to a permanent 500-acre limit and longer 6-mile isolation distances.

Canola growers prefer an amendment without the GE acreage limit that requires 3-mile isolation distances regardless of variety. The ODA would also resolve disputes with a chance-based method under this version, while the proposal favored by speciality seed producers would allow the agency to choose an alternative method that isn’t neutral.

Regulating crops based on GE traits lacks a scientific basis and will set a bad precedent that will harm Oregon’s entire agriculture industry, including specialty seed production, according to canola advocates.

‘Stick to research’

“In Canada, they successfully grow GE and organic canola and you can’t tell me we’re not smart enough here, utilizing the regulatory framework laid out in this bill,” said Hadley. “It’s imperative this body stick to research and facts, not make laws out of fear.”

According to the specialty seed producers, the 500-acre cap and other restrictions on GE crops will help protect their market, as international seed buyers reject contaminated crops, while still allowing canola production to expand.

“The bill doesn’t need to solve every nuance of coexistence. It just needs to cement the essential elements that constitute coexistence’s foundation,” said Charles Ortiz, representative of the Willamette Valley Specialty Seed Association.

Specialty seed producers still have reservations about the overall legislation but believe the GE-related protective measures will at least guard against the biggest threats to their industry, said Alice Morrison, co-director of the Friends of Family Farmers nonprofit.

“We see it as better than the status quo and certainly better than letting the Willamette Valley Protected District regulations sunset in their entirety,” she said, referring to regional canola restrictions. “While this is not an ideal proposal, we understand the need for compromise. We feel the items included are an adequate next step.”

‘Unique risk’

GE canola varieties pose a “unique risk” because their pollen can cross with wild mustard species, which can then contaminate Brassica vegetable seed crops, said Kenny Smith, a representative of WVSSA.

Varieties of GE canola have escaped cultivation in 20 documented instances across the world, he said. “This would not be good for the reputation of the Willamette Valley. We’re not on this table and we don’t want to be.”

Carol Mallory Smith, a retired Oregon State University weed scientist, said that example does not tell the whole story, as the publication documenting the escapes found “no reports of serious detrimental consequences.”

Measures that prevent cross-pollination among conventional Brassica crops will work just as effectively for GE varieties, whose pollen doesn’t behave any differently, said Mallory Smith, who authored an OSU study on canola coexistence with related crops.

Meanwhile, limiting GE crops to 500 acres will hinder Willamette Valley farmers from taking advantage of future biotechnology developments, she said. “Putting this into law could have long-term negative effects on agriculture.”

Farmers in the valley are plowing out grass seed acreage, which may foreshadow a broader shift in the region’s agriculture industry, said Jason Scharf, a canola grower near Amity, Ore. Canola will help expand their market options while offering a profitable rotation crop.

Genetic engineering is often associated with herbicide-tolerant crops but the 500-acre cap may paint farmers into a corner, impeding their ability to benefit from insect- and disease-resistant GE varieties, Scharf said. “We don’t know what could be coming, but here we are cutting it off at the knees.”

Lawmakers are faced with tough decisions but the canola negotiations have made progress that should be preserved, even if the ultimate resolution doesn’t come during this legislative session, said Helm, whose House Agriculture Committee is the first to review the proposal.

“We’ve got a bill in front of us that is at least 95% of the way there,” he said.