I'd bought some plants a couple of wks ago, either in San Marcos or San Antonio (maybe Wimberley...I'm a plantaholic) and noticed on the back of the plant labels, it said "Propogating Prohibited"...huh? Has anyone else seen this? I'm a Master Gardener in Blanco Co. and can propagate almost anything (having a hard time w/ Tx Madrone). Can I get caught breaking the law & be arrested? Should I stop giving plants I've progagated away in case I give one to the plant police...I'm sure they work undercover. What's up w/ that?!
New words on plant labels
I had never heard of it, but it probably is prohibited for commercial purposes if the the plant is patented. I am not sure how long a patent lasts, but that is probably the reason.
Josephine.
Actually, I think Yes. This turned into a heated discussion on a Brug forum last winter. Patented plants is the reason. Obviously not because you can't but shouldn't. Morals should kick in at this point I suppose. I will see if I can find that thread.
a patent on a plant .... hmmm
that sounds about as rediculous as me trying to patent my natural haircolor... oh wait half the planet has it as theirs too... i guess they owe me big huh?
or maybe i'm just tired
The Plant Patent Act of 1930 was enacted to encourage Americans to come up with new plants and to protect the ones that do.
http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/gl_plants_propagation/article/0,1785,HGTV_3611_1397126,00.html
Thank you for the clarification Claypa.
Josephine.
I freaked the first time I saw that a plant was patented, but then I realized it could represent years of effort on someone's part, and that's how they make a living.
Besides, the only patented plants I have cost $4.95 plus tax, and they're a lot better at propagating Azaleas than I am!
I see your point.
We should be concerned with the growing trend of corporations obtaining "patents" on all or part of plants and animals for their own....like the patenting of the compound in the Neem tree that is used for insect control....a centuries old known source used by farmers in India....now faced with the outrageous dilemma of paying "royalties" to
the company owning such "patent" (I think it was Grace Co....maybe "W.R." Grace...I'm unsure about the full name) This is the tip of the iceberg,...I'm sure!
Development of a hybrid plant is one thing...and should be protected with a patent.....but to have the arrogance to file for patents on DNA sequences that are discovered from any plant or animal or anything else NATURAL and here,...long before any scientist, lawyer or other corporate pawn that helps this process...came along; is shameful and yet apparently,...acceptable behavior.....at least to a growing number of corporations with no regard to individual or social rights...
You're really up on this Willis...thanks for the info (as bad as it is)
I'm not sure much can be done to stop it now....I think it's been going on since shortly after the advent of DNA sequencing....slowly at first but rapidly growing as the processes were being refined....but such activities aren't exactly broadcasted to the masses...openly.....kinda like "U.N. Biospheres"....not many people really know about it.
Edited to include proper designation
This message was edited May 26, 2007 9:27 AM