Jun 30, 2016 by

Court rules organic farmers can sue conventional, GMO farmers whose pesticides ‘trespass’ and contaminate their fields

zs_zs_ZS_kpPurveyors of conventional and genetically-modified (GM) crops — and the pesticides and herbicides that accompany them — are finally getting a taste of their own legal medicine.

Minnesota’s Star Tribune has reported that the Minnesota Court of Appeals recently ruled that a large organic farm surrounded by chemical-laden conventional farms can seek damages for lost crops, as well as lost profits, caused by the illegal trespassing of pesticides and herbicides on its property.

Oluf and Debra Johnson’s 1,500-acre organic farm in Stearns County, Minn., has repeatedly been contaminated by nearby conventional and GMO farms since the couple started it in the 1990s.

A local pesticide cooperative known as Paynesville Farmers Union (PFU), which is near the farm, has been cited at least four times for violating pesticide laws, and inadvertently causing damage to the Johnson’s farm.

The first time it was realized that pesticides had drifted onto the Johnson’s farm in 1998, PFU apologized, but did not agree to pay for damages. As anyone with an understanding of organic practices knows, even a small bit of contamination can result in having to plow under that season’s crops, forget profits, and even lose the ability to grow organic crops in the same field for at least a couple years.

The Johnson’s let the first incident slide. But after the second, third, and fourth times, they decided that enough was enough. Following the second pesticide drift in 2002, the Johnson’s filed a complaint with the Minnesota Agriculture Department, which eventually ruled that PFU had illegally sprayed chemicals on windy days, which led to contamination of the Johnson’s organic  crops.

PFU settled with the Johnson’s out of court, and the Johnson’s agreed to sell their tainted products as non-organics for a lower price, and pull the fields from production for three years in order to bring them back up to organic standards. But PFU’s inconsiderate spraying habits continued, with numerous additional incidents occurring in 2005, 2007, and 2008, according to the Star Tribune.

After enduring much hardship, the Johnson’s finally ended up suing PFU in 2009 for negligence and trespass, only to receive denial from the district court that received the case.

But after appealing, the Johnson’s received favor from the Appeals Court, which ruled that particulate matter, including pesticides, herbicides, and even GM particulates, that contaminates nearby fields is, in fact, considered illegal trespass, and is subject to the same laws concerning other forms of trespass.

In a similar case, a California-based organic farm  recently won a $1 million lawsuit filed against a conventional farm whose pesticides spread through fog from several miles away, and contaminated its fields.

Jacobs Farm / Del Cobo’s entire season’s herb crop had to be discarded as a result, and the court that presided over the case acknowledged and agreed that the polluters must be held responsible (…).

Precedent has now been set for organic farmers to sue biotechnology companies whose GMOs contaminate their crops

The stunning victories of both the Johnson’s and Jacob’s Farm / Del Cobo against their chemical-polluting neighbors is huge, in that it represents a new set legal precedent for holding conventional, factory farming operations responsible for the damage their systems cause to other farms.

And with this new precedent set, many more organic farmers, for instance, can now begin suing GMO farmers for both chemical and genetic pollution that drifts onto their farms.

Many NaturalNews readers will recall the numerous incidents involving lawsuits  filed by Monsanto against non-GMO farms whose crops were inadvertently contaminated by GM material. In many of these cases, the defendants ended up becoming bankrupted by Monsanto, even though Monsanto’s patented materials were the trespassers at fault.

Be sure to check out the extensive and very informative report compiled by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) entitled Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers for a complete history of Monsanto’s war against traditional American agriculture:…

But it appears that the tables are now turning. Instead of Monsanto winning against organic farmers, organic farmers can now achieve victory against Monsanto.

In other words, farmers being infringed upon by the drifting of GM material into their fields now have a legal leg to stand on in the pursuit of justice against Monsanto and the other biotechnology giants whose “frankencrops” are responsible for causing widespread contamination of the American food supply.

Genetic traits are highly transmissible, whether it be through pollen transfer or seed spread, and organic and non-GMO farmers have every right to seek damages for illegal trespassing when such transmission takes place.

It is expected that many more organic farms will step up and begin seeking justice and compensation for damage caused by crop chemicals, GM materials, and other harmful invaders.

For too long, Monsanto has been getting away with suing farmers whose crops have become contaminated by Monsanto’s patented genetic traits and chemical materials, and winning.

Thankfully, the justice system seems to now recognize the severe error in this, and is now beginning to rightfully hold polluters and trespassers responsible. Monsanto, your days are numbered.


  1. FirstOfficer

    “The Johnson’s let the first incident slide. But after the second, third, and fourth times, they decided that enough was enough. Following the second pesticide drift in 2002, the Johnson’s filed a complaint with the Minnesota Agriculture Department.”

    Did the Johnson’s travel forward and then backward in time?

  2. FirstOfficer

    I’m curious, do you have actual court case numbers whereby Monsanto had sued for inadvertent drift? Didn’t the US Supreme Court throw out a suit from the OCA whereby the OCA contended that Monsanto had made such suits and wanted to prevent further suits but the OCA, et al, could not produce a single instance of Monsanto suing for inadvertent drift?

  3. These pesticide cases are not new precedents. For example, Washington State has had strong chemical trespass laws for decades. I am an organic farmer who won out of court settlements for spray drifts and lost organic crops and certification in about 1992 in grant County, WA. The largest settlement was $500,000, the limit of defendant’s insurance. The GMO’s and Monsanto, Syngenta, etc. enjoy extra court protection because of US politicised Supreme Court that set precedents out of line with chemical drift contamination case law. It is a travesty and loss of rule-by-law in the United States and Canada as well. GMO’s have benefitted from corruption of centuries long traditional English law principles. Expect no relief from Hillary Clinton as POTUS.

    • I lost a jury trial in one case, however, because the local jury felt sorry for their custom sprayer neighbour and his family. People should realize and certainly jurors, that the mere word of “insurance” in a jury trial, causes a mistrial. The jury has to figure out on its own that the defendants probably are insured. This is the handiwork of insurance industry lobby. Extremely sensitive grapes in the Yakima Valley were damaged for years from upwind wheat 2-4D spray applications. It took years to prove from whom and when the responsible spray came. I think it took a class action suit to stop them. The grapes were not organic.

    • The point is that Chemical trespass law has been dissociated from genetic contamination trespasses. This article is as misleading as it should be logical.

  4. simple-touriste

    Can you please cite a few cases where Monsanto sued other “contaminated” farmers?

    • Tom Backus

      watch the movie Food Inc. there is a whole segment on farmers monsanto sues out of existance or forces to use their products

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *