PLANTS

The dealer wishes to remain anonymous. Not that he's ashamed of his seeds: on the contrary, he's doubts you'll find better in England . Once you've tried their crop, he believes, you'll be hooked. But if he told you how to buy them, he could be prosecuted - and a small businessman like him can ill-afford a £5,000 fine. He plies his illicit trade in Devon , in a small nursery. He cannot publicise it, for obvious reasons; but word of mouth ensures that a furtive army of enthusiastic users buys his moonshine seeds in their thousands. Many in turn will risk prosecution by growing them and selling their seed themselves. Others, more cautiously, will restrict themselves to "personal use". The crop in question goes by the exotic name of 'White Princess'. But it is not, as you might suspect, a variety of cannabis. Rather, it is a tomato - a "meltingly, sumptuously tasty" variety, according to the pusher, but a mere tomato none the less. And if that strikes you as surprising, you'll be even more surprised to discover that 'White Princess' are just the tip of the iceberg. This is a story of the bizarre, seldom-seen subculture of unlicensed vegetable-growing. Its wares include rogue tomatoes, "bad" apples and "hot" potatoes; tomatoes are as good an illustration as any of how the market works. Most of us buy our tomatoes from supermarkets. They're convenient, but their cool, watery flavour is disappointingly bland. If you're willing to pay double, you can sometimes buy tomatoes that actually taste of something from the supermarkets' posh ranges. But even these are difficult to get excited about. For those who know where to get their hands on the hard stuff, though, the tomato is an altogether different proposition. Insipid, shop-bought fruits are for losers, but the words 'Tibet Appels', 'Sundrop' and 'Fakel' are whispered by connoisseurs like the names of Pagan goddesses, and just to inhale the scent of a 'Spanish Big Globe' can make grown men weep with pleasure. The only problem with these fat, tangy little balls of perfection is that you, the consumer, just can't have them. The Plant Varieties and Seeds Act (1964) makes these tomatoes forbidden fruit - well, at least the seeds from which they are grown. According to the act, anyone wanting to sell the seeds of a fruit or vegetable must first register the variety on a National List. Before registration, it must be tested to ensure it is "distinct, uniform and stable", and a fee must be paid. Sadly for amateur growers, these fees add up to nearly £1,000, in the case of tomatoes, plus an annual renewal fee of £185. There are no exceptions, no grants for amateur growers, and it is illegal for anyone to sell the seeds of unregistered fruit or, by implication, the fruit itself. Even if they can pass the tests (and the variety 'My Girl' is many things, but its fruits - anything between cherry and avocado-sized - could never be called "uniform") the only people who can afford to register them are huge companies that sell to supermarket chains (the familiar comedy-villain Monsanto being one example); the result is that only mass-market, supermarket-friendly varieties are registered. Varieties of interest only to amateurs are ignored, and it becomes illegal to sell them; so, with no growing plants providing seeds for the future, they're simply becoming extinct. According to Defra, "It is generally an offence to market a variety of seeds not on the National List or EC Common Catalogue." It's fair to say Defra doesn't police the law with much conviction, but the multinationals are always watching. In 1998 a company that illegally marketed grass seed was successfully prosecuted under the Plant Varieties and Seeds Act 1964. It was fined a total of £7,500 and ordered to pay costs of £7,964. But it's not just the staggering superiority of flavour that makes heritage varieties important. Only by continuing to grow them can we discover which varieties might be blight resistant, or grow abundantly in a drought, or turn out to be a miracle cure for cancer. "If we find one of our tomatoes standing up particularly well to these scorching conditions," said Alan Gear, the co-director of the HDRA, from a 40C poly-tunnel on Monday, "that could be incredibly important if predictions of global warming come true." Diversity, in all species, is nature's way of surviving unpredictable disasters. (Independent 19 August 2003 )

Since  last  autumn  the  owners  of  many  of  the  best-known  gardens  and  plant  nurseries  in  Britain  have  been  enduring  a  reign  of  terror,  thanks  to  what  appears  to  be  an  astonishing  blunder  by  the  European  Commission  and  officials  of  the  Department  of  the  Environment,  Food  and  Rural  Affairs.  Although  this  has  cost  its  victims  millions  of  pounds,  the  conspiracy  of  silence  surrounding  the  scandal  was  only  dispelled  last  week  by  Charles  Williams,  whose  family  owns  Caerhays  Castle  in  Cornwall ,  with  its  celebrated  gardens.  Mr  Williams  pointed  out  what  Britain 's  plant  experts  have  been  keeping  quiet  for  months:  that  an  American  plant  disease,  supposedly  deadly  to  oak  trees,  has  in  fact  been  harmlessly  endemic  in  British  shrubs  for  years,  and  that  the  campaign  to  eradicate  it  by  hundreds  of  Defra  inspectors  is  based  on  hysterical  over-reaction.  On  September  19,  2002,  the  European  Commission  rushed  out  Decision  2002/757,  ordering  EU  member  states  to  wipe  out  a  "harmful  organism",  Phytophthora  ramorum,  found  in  rhododendrons  and  viburnums.  This  was  supposedly  the  cause  of  a  disease  known  as  sudden  oak  death  syndrome,  which  has  been  devastating  trees  on  the  west  coast  of  the  United  States.  Defra's  plant  health  inspectorate  in  York  leapt  to  comply  with  what  cries  ought  to  be  called  "Sods  law".  An  army  of  inspectors  began  serving  enforcement  notices  wherever  they  found  the  "harmful  organism"  in  British  shrubs,  seemingly  unaware  that  the  reason  it  was  so  widespread  was  that  it  had  been  around  for  decades,  causing  no  damage  to  British  plants  other  than  temporary  die-back  in  rhododendrons.  I  was  first  alerted  to  the  hysteria  this  was  generating  last  November,  when  I  was  approached  by  a  leading  rhododendron-grower  who  had  watched  in  horror  as  100,000-worth  of  his  plants  went  up  in  smoke.  What  appalled  him  was  the  response  of  Dr  Stephen  Hunter,  head  of  the  Plant  Health  Division  in  York ,  who  explained  that  Defra  could  not  pay  compensation  for  losses  resulting  from  action  to  prevent  diseases,  since  these  were  "taken  for  the  benefit  of  the  industry  and  the  environment".  (Dr  Hunter  seemed  to  have  forgotten  that  Defra  had  just  paid  3  billion  to  compensate  farmers  whose  animals  were  destroyed  for  the  same  reason  during  the  foot  and  mouth  crisis.)  Before  I  could  report  this,  the  victim  changed  his  mind,  imploring  me  not  to  publish  for  fear  it  might  frighten  away  his  customers.  The  same  climate  of  fear  has  gripped  scores  of  other  owners,  who  have  endured  their  losses  in  silence.  Recently,  Cornwall 's  "lost  gardens  of  Heligan"  were  featured  on  regional  television  as  among  the  victims.  But  last  week  the  owners  decided  to  say  no  more  for  fear  of  losing  visitors.  At  this  point  Mr  Williams  of  Caerhays,  a  near  neighbour  to  Heligan,  decided  the  moment  had  come  to  speak  out  against  the  "fatuity"  of  Defra's  officials,  who  appear  to  have  "discovered  a  new  way  to  destroy  another  part  of  Britain 's  countryside".  What  is  particularly  chilling,  as  Mr  Williams  points  out,  is  that  not  one  of  the  attempts  to  infect  a  British  oak  trees  with  the  harmful  organism  has  been  successful.  Meanwhile  Defra  seems  so  oblivious  to  the  damage  it  is  inflicting  that,  although  its  "impact  assessment"  estimates  the  costs  of  the  EU  law  to  British  growers  at  £1-£2  million  a  year,  this  relates  only  to  the  cost  of  additional  paperwork.  It  ignores  losses  incurred  by  the  owners  themselves,  who  have  been  ordered  to  burn  hundreds  of  acres  of  valuable  plants. (Christopher Booker's Notebook Sunday Telegraph   03/08/2003 )

The bay-leaf sucker is a pest of bay trees. I was told by the RHS, "the only suitable insecticide has been withdrawn from sale". Luckily, retailers are being allowed to sell the old stock of the insecticide Doff's Systemic and the excellent Wisley Plant Centre had 17 bottles left. Why is Doff not allowed to supply this anti-insect brew any more? Mr Murray Srnedley, its technical manager told me it is being taken out of the hands of gardeners because the European Union is doing a review of all pesticides, requiring that the whole lot should be re-registered. (Pesticide Directive 91/676) If Doff tried to re-register its systemic insecticide, it would have to pay tens of thousands of pounds for the privilege. The likely sales would not justify the cost. The expense is huge because the EU is being so demanding in its registration process. In the old days, when the British government was registering pesticides, it would require tests to be done. But it used some common sense. If a chemical had been tested to death for 'agricultural' use, the Government would often be prepared to extrapolate the information to help decide whether the same chemical could be used by 'gardeners'. The EU, however, tends to want specific tests for the chemical when used on each of different crops by different sorts of people, such as gardeners. It means hundreds more tests. First, many of the tests are unnecessary. They reproduce what has been done years ago or what could reasonably be extrapolated. They are a waste of everybody's money Second, the heavy cost means useful products such as Doff's Systemic are entirely dropped, to the disadvantage of gardeners. Mr Smedley expects half the pesticides on the shelves to vanish during the next three years. Third, many of the extra, unnecessary tests are on animals. They include shooting chemicals into the eyes of rabbits to see how quickly they go blind; putting them on the skin of guinea pigs to see how much damage is done; and feeding them to animals, to see how ill they get. The EU re-registration programme and the extra pernicketiness of it mean new animal testing on a vast scale. How absurd it is that animal-rights terrorists are persecuting Huntingdon Life Sciences, one of the animal testing laboratories. They are going for the wrong target, as well as going about it in a despicable way. Testing can be done anywhere in the world. If it is not done at Huntingdon, it will be done elsewhere. The EU is the organisation that causes much of the testing to be done. ( The Idle Gardener, James Bartholomew, Daily Telegraph "Weekend" Gardening 24th Feb. 2001)

90 Scots Pines from Scotland planted in Germany a year ago are now classified as German pines according to EC rules (BBC Radio 4 Farming Programme 1 March 1999)

Austria thought it would show goodwill at Christmas by sending Christmas trees to Germany and Italy. In both cases border guards impounded the trees because they were too long for EU roads. The Germans cut the top off and nailed it back on later; the Italians shortened the trees with axes, removed the branches and fined the driver. (Telegraph 26/11/97)(FFP)

Small nurserymen and plant breeders can be put out of business under new registration regulations. (Farmers Guardian 2/10/92). Rules regarding the phyto sanitation certificates are in chaos. MAFF is to charge £83 per hour to inspect a nursery to grant a plant health passport.

British oak seeds are not recognised as suitable for planting in other EC countries (FT 24/1/93). The CEC denied there is a directive on this but 71/161/EEC approves forests where oak seeds can be taken and virtually no UK ones are recognised. The EU Forest Reproductive Material Directive is based in the Nazi race laws. If a tree looks racially pure then its seeds can be used. Only straight trees are permitted but this depends on soil and planting conditions (Guardian 15/11/94) Many British oaks are hybrids of pedunculate and sessile strains. These are highly successful in the British climate but it is forbidden to sell the acorns for replanting. Therefore 75% of acorns sold for planting in the UK are imports from Hungary and Poland (Independent 20/11/94). There is a possibility that native British birds and insects will reject these foreign species (Independent on Sunday 8/12/96)

Farmers who want to beautify their set-aside land with wild flowers will be breaking the law. This is because the seeds are from wild flowers and it is an offence to sow seeds which are not EU approved. Because wild flower seeds are highly variable they do not conform to EU regulations on distinctness and uniformity. Approved seeds grown as fodder crops, such as red clover, are highly uniform and would compete adversely with natural diverse wild species. Approved seeds are unattractive to wild insects such as butterflies. Many approved seeds are not native to the UK, such as Albanian buttercup contained in approved mixtures. (Independent 25/10/94).

It is a criminal offence to market the seeds of hundreds of rare fodder and fibre plants and vegetables, many flavourful and disease resistant. These rare seeds have not been tested, an expensive operation only economic for commercial varieties. Ruyton Organic gardens preserve 800 varieties of vegetables that it is illegal to sell. It costs GBP2,000 to register a rare variety of vegetable. Although the EU supports the UN Biodiversity Policy this regulation is designed to make rare plants extinct. 2,000 rare fruit and vegetables have become extinct as a result. (BBC 2 Food Programme 25/3/97). Many rare plants posses qualities such as long storage life which genetic engineers are trying to insert into commercial varieties. They are not used because they are not patentable. The EU says it is addressing the problem of this 20-year-old regulation. (E-File BBC 1 8/6/97) The CEC goes further and claims that there are directives that do allow for the marketing by small producers to non-professional consumers of seeds not on the National Lists. The EU even gives grants to farmers to continue to cultivate traditional varieties under threat by genetic erosion. (CEC Myth135 Aug 1995). Our Ministry of Agriculture says these directives are not relevant. The Henry Doubleday Research Association confirms that it is forbidden to market the seeds of rare vegetables, etc. There is a long-term hope that the European Parliament can negotiate an amendment to the original directive COM (93) 598 but as this also involves genetically modified organisms it is held up in political arguments. The French have defied the Commission and passed a law allowing the marketing of unlisted seeds (HDRA 3/2/98)

Bere is an ancient cereal now only grown in the Orkneys. It was first used in Mesopotamia thousands of years ago. The Orkney Council was concerned that it could become extinct and commissioned a farmer to grow a crop and sell seed to other local farmers. This would ensure the survival of the local food, bere bannocks. Under the regulations, because bere seed is not licensed, this rescue operation is a criminal conspiracy (BBC R4 13/11/94).

Colin Simpson had a small surplus of rare tomato seeds that he advertised for sale. He was visited by MAFF inspectors who told him he was breaking the EU law. He then formed the Tomato Trialling Club and was able to sell his seed for flavour trials. Later MAFF inspectors told him to stop because he was not conforming to EU trialling regulations. He should have been trialling the tomatoes for long shelf life, consistent size and short ripening season, flavour was not a part of EU seed trial criteria (BBC R4 27/8/96)

One third of cereal crops are grown from seed saved by the farmer. Now farmers have to pay a levy to the seedsman for saved seeds. The levy has been set at GBP4.25 per hectare (FT 21/3/96). At this level, after the cost of cleaning and dressing this practice will be uneconomical. This new Directive also requires the farmer to keep records of all crops grown on the farm stating the origin of all seeds, even those not saved.

The World Wide Fund for Nature has developed a scheme to encourage stores to sell only ecologically sound timber certified by the Forest Stewardship Council. This scheme is illegal under European law, according to the Timber Trades Association (New Scientist 18/5/96)

The EU Parliament wants to legislate for a common approach to forestry. The Agriculture Committee will consider a proposal for uniform certification of sustainable forests. In the UK there is already a system of forest certification operated by the Forestry Commission. There is no need for the EU to impose an alternative system that will be influenced by environmental conditions that do not occur in the UK. A clear case of the need for subsidiarity (CLA May 1996)

VAT has to be charged on holly and mistletoe because they are now classed as horticultural produce sold in bulk. (Times 24/12/95 p1)