Last week, I attended the 2008 CIOPORA conference and AGM held just outside Geneva, Switzerland. CIOPORA is the international community of breeders of asexually reproduced ornamental and fruit varieties and has over 130 members from all over the world, consisting of breeders of new plant varieties, their agents and lawyers, as well as representatives from grower associations.

From a personal point of view, it was an affirming experience to be in a conference facility with more than sixty like-minded people, albeit I was the only member to attend from the UK (I’m grateful that English is the official language of CIOPORA!). It reinforced my long-held opinion that plant breeders are genuinely friendly people who are passionate about what they do. Even the lawyers aren’t too bad!

CIOPORA concentrates its efforts on the legal aspects of plant breeding, in particular Plant Variety Rights, Plant Patents and trademarks. There was a vigorous debate on the subject of Essentially Derived Varieties (which always sounds like a dense and unexciting subject but is certainly capable of arousing the passions in CIOPORA members!) and an extended discussion on anti-infringement actions taken by members jointly under the CIOPORA umbrella. In addition, there were interesting presentations on points of law, new genetic techniques and practices in the Plant Variety Rights industry.

Membership of CIOPORA should be an essential activity for anyone serious about breeding new plant varieties and commercially exploiting their work. Details of membership can be found at the CIOPORA website. Clients of PFE should also look out for a new opportunity coming soon to show your support for this organisation which works to protect the legitimate interests of breeders and licensees alike.

The European Union regulation covering who is entitled to apply for European Plant Variety Rights has been amended. Previously, applicants had to be either a citizen of the EU or of a nation that is a member of UPOV. This has now been changed so that anyone can apply for EU PVR, regardless of nationality or residence.

Of course, anyone who is not a resident of the EU is still required to appoint a procedural representative to file applications on their behalf. Plants for Europe can assist in this regard, whether or not we are asked to act as agent for the purposes of licensing or royalty collection. Contact us for details and fees.

Details of the regulations that apply can be found on the CPVO’s website here.

I am sure that all of our customers and friends will join us in sending congratulations to Chris Sargent of PMA who has recently become the father of Ben, a brother for Amber. Mum Anna and Ben are both doing well. What a splendid early Christmas gift!

I’ve written here about non-native and invasive species before. DEFRA has just published a consultation on the review of schedule 9 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and a ban on the sale of certain non-native species with responses requested by the end of January 2008.

This document is very alarming for growers, landscapers, importers, plant breeders and gardeners because there are several important garden and landscape plants that will be "scheduled" and will thus not be permitted to be imported, sold or planted for "introduction to the wild" - and, in some cases, possession will become unlawful. Included in the list are all Cotoneaster, all Crocosmia, Robinia pseudoacacia, Rosa rugosa and Quercus ilex.

Even more worryingly, there is a proposal to include all hybrids of listed species without having to specifically list each hybrid in the schedule. In the case of Rosa rugosa, described in The Hillier Manual of Trees and Shrubs as "the parent of innumerable hybrids", literally hundreds of popular varieties could be banned. The same could be true of Rhododendron ponticum, undoubtedly a pest where it is naturalised, but also an important parent of hybrid varieties.

It’s not clear what is meant by "the wild", particularly when the justification for adding some species (such as Crocosmia and Quercus ilex) is that they have been planted in gardens and parks and have spread into the wider environment or merely have the potential to do so - surely this is less a problem with the species concerned and more of an issue with landscape maangement. Also, because the list seems to anticipate potential problems that have not yet arisen with some species, there is a worry that other plants could be added even if they have not become a problem. Study of the list also shows a few plants that perhaps might be added in the future, since the same criteria that have been applied to the existing list could be applied to them - Buddleja davidii and Geranium oxonianum spring to mind.

It is our view that this document takes a step too far. It is only by speaking up that growers, breeders and gardeners can hope to amend this proposal before it becomes law. Therefore, I recommend that you read the document and complete the response form as soon as you can.

You may recall that I wrote in March that DEFRA had commissioned a study into responsibility and cost-sharing for plant health with particular reference to quarantine plant health issues. The report has now been published and presents the options for responsiblity and cost-sharing and can be found here. PFE was pleased to have the opportunity to discuss the issues with Jeff Waage, the author, and hope that our contribution was useful.

Turkey will become the 65th member of UPOV on November 18th. This means that there is an effective system in place in that country for the protection of breeders’ rights. Turkey is an important producer of cut flowers and some other plants and could be an important market for some PFE breeder clients. There have been problems reported in recent years with illegal propagation by Turkish growers, so it is to be hoped that breeders will now have the legal tools to fight this effectively.