Why aren't there more greenhouses growing Kava in the U.S. ?

[Bula Kava House]

Maybe they're out there, but I never hear about them.
I was under the impression that you could grow practically anything in a greenhouse.
Even that other botanical that starts with the letter "K" and for years most people believed it could only be grown in Asian climates, is now abundantly growing in the U.S. In fact, in some U.S. regions, that plant is grown outside of a greenhouse.
What's holding back Kava, from doing the same ?

I've tried a bunch of kava in a little mini greenhouse here in Oregon. Hard to get cuttings to root, and even rooted cuttings don't last long. I'm sure a more experienced farmer could have more success. Funny enough, the only plant I've gotten to survive more than a couple months is a nene that I put in a terrarium. It's been a couple years and it's still surviving here at the kava bar. It's basically banzai kava

 

[Kojo Douglas]

I just have to put my thought to this, as I know I have state it plenty of times in the zoom calls.

My first point is why? Just because it has happen in the past to other crops, why is this a solid reasoning it should happen again?

"Bowman v. Monsanto Co., 569 U.S. 278 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court patent decision in which the Court unanimously affirmed the decision of the Federal Circuit that the patent exhaustion doctrine does not permit a farmer to plant and grow saved, patented seeds without the patent owner's permission.[1]"

So what makes Kava a 3000 year old human created plant make it not the same case as Monsanto here.

is Monsanto not an organization of many people...

The area kava is grown in not know for being prosperous and not having many cash crops. Other area were kava could grow have more chances at economic development from other means so why would we take there chances at thriving in this world away.

Along with that the pacific islands are number one at risk for climate disasters in which the western nation who now wish to exploit kava caused. So at the very least the islands having kava can be there safety net for the disaster we created.

Please follow up on why I am wrong here and that we should allow kava to be stolen from the lands in which it is there intellectual property.

I do not see any reasoning behind how this is moral unless it is treated the same as Monsanto. Anything else is straight up theft. Just like any IP theft.

Yes, the Supreme Court ruled that Monsanto's genetically-modified maize could be patented and that farmers couldn't save seed and replant it. They actually went beyond this and further genetically modified maize so that its genetics would deteriorate after the initial planting - forcing farmers to buy new seed every season. This was a case that went through the US legal system and was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court.

Introducing issues like climate change and economic development are interesting for debate, but can they be considered along with this issue of patents? Or are they just red herrings? I think it's better to stick to the main questions:

Can a crop grown by multiple ethnic groups across multiple countries be patented for only those people to plant it? Who gets to grow it? Everyone in those countries? Only the indigenous people who have traditionally planted Kava? Does their blood have to be a certain percent indigenous? Can immigrants grow it? Can non-native people be involved in its sale, export, consumption? Why or why not?

How can this be enforced? If people are farming Kava in Australia does Interpol get involved? What about people in California? Ecuador? Costa Rica? Tanzania? Who will enforce the laws around this patent?

Ultimately the main question is - who gets to speak for Kava? Who are the "original" Kava farmers? Should only they be allowed to grow Kava?

Should we be allowed to drink Kava?

Perhaps a bigger question is - why is the economic development and quality of life in these countries dependent on Kava cultivation? Isn't that a bigger issue?

Also - are the people in these countries who are selling Kava and becoming wealthy funneling that cash into economic development? Is Kava actually causing inequality in some circumstances?

 

[_byron]

Yes, the Supreme Court ruled that Monsanto's genetically-modified maize could be patented and that farmers couldn't save seed and replant it. They actually went beyond this and further genetically modified maize so that its genetics would deteriorate after the initial planting - forcing farmers to buy new seed every season. This was a case that went through the US legal system and was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court.

Introducing issues like climate change and economic development are interesting for debate, but can they be considered along with this issue of patents? Or are they just red herrings? I think it's better to stick to the main questions:

Can a crop grown by multiple ethnic groups across multiple countries be patented for only those people to plant it? Who gets to grow it? Everyone in those countries? Only the indigenous people who have traditionally planted Kava? Does their blood have to be a certain percent indigenous? Can immigrants grow it? Can non-native people be involved in its sale, export, consumption? Why or why not?

How can this be enforced? If people are farming Kava in Australia does Interpol get involved? What about people in California? Ecuador? Costa Rica? Tanzania? Who will enforce the laws around this patent?

Ultimately the main question is - who gets to speak for Kava? Who are the "original" Kava farmers? Should only they be allowed to grow Kava?

Should we be allowed to drink Kava?

Perhaps a bigger question is - why is the economic development and quality of life in these countries dependent on Kava cultivation? Isn't that a bigger issue?

Also - are the people in these countries who are selling Kava and becoming wealthy funneling that cash into economic development? Is Kava actually causing inequality in some circumstances?

That is a lot of question throwing off from the main point.

Kava should remain on the islands for as long as possible. I do think there will become a time where kava becomes more popular that to even sustain cultural usage in the islands people could be out priced. That would be my biggest fear with kava staying only on the islands. But that has a decent ways to go and there is more capacity to fulfill more kava.

Why shouldn't the farmers depend on kava as there economic development? The villages that farm kava have been doing it there whole life. And the funds that kava can bring them can lead to more chances for economic development for the farmers and villages.

To answer you last question that would depend on the ethics of the exporter. I know some exporters wish to bring water and electricity to rural areas so people can have better quality of life with better sanitation standards. There is also pricing minimums that must be paid to the farmers.

The only thing holding back kava is there is no "formal organization" holding the rights. If kava was somehow just cultivated today by a company like Monsanto they would patent it right?

I think Alia nailed it with is this more of a legal question or a moral one. And I would have to say it is more of a moral one. The Codex does define cultivars from the islands with a designation and if others grow kava they do not get this designation.

I see how it could be legal but should it be? because it definitely is not moral, and at the end of the day shouldn't it be the responsibility of developed nations to support developing nations?

 

[Bula Kava House]

Yes, the Supreme Court ruled that Monsanto's genetically-modified maize could be patented and that farmers couldn't save seed and replant it. They actually went beyond this and further genetically modified maize so that its genetics would deteriorate after the initial planting - forcing farmers to buy new seed every season. This was a case that went through the US legal system and was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court.

Introducing issues like climate change and economic development are interesting for debate, but can they be considered along with this issue of patents? Or are they just red herrings? I think it's better to stick to the main questions:

Can a crop grown by multiple ethnic groups across multiple countries be patented for only those people to plant it? Who gets to grow it? Everyone in those countries? Only the indigenous people who have traditionally planted Kava? Does their blood have to be a certain percent indigenous? Can immigrants grow it? Can non-native people be involved in its sale, export, consumption? Why or why not?

How can this be enforced? If people are farming Kava in Australia does Interpol get involved? What about people in California? Ecuador? Costa Rica? Tanzania? Who will enforce the laws around this patent?

Ultimately the main question is - who gets to speak for Kava? Who are the "original" Kava farmers? Should only they be allowed to grow Kava?

Should we be allowed to drink Kava?

Perhaps a bigger question is - why is the economic development and quality of life in these countries dependent on Kava cultivation? Isn't that a bigger issue?

Also - are the people in these countries who are selling Kava and becoming wealthy funneling that cash into economic development? Is Kava actually causing inequality in some circumstances?

I understand why pacific islands would want to prevent kava from spreading any further. I want to be the only online kava vendor. But I don't know why many people are assuming that Pacific Islanders couldn't compete. They have the advantages of perfect growing conditions, a lot of genetic material, generations of knowledge, cheap labor, lots of generationally owned land, etc. It would force innovation and improvement, but isn't that a good thing? I've said this before, but any kava importer who tests their kava for quality has had to throw out a lot of product. Aside from a couple processors, there has been limited improvement at best. Furthermore, the current high price of kava is not simply a supply and demand thing. There's lots of kava in the ground right now, but the prices climb because they can. The catch 22 here is that the somewhat artificially high price of kava will be part of the reason others try to grow it.

The question of who kava belongs to is an interesting one. It may have started in PNG, really blew up with the Ni-Vans. Made it much later to Hawaii. Ni-Vans are definitely not Polynesian. They have different lineages, yet we don't tell Hawaiians they shouldn't grow kava. Kava growing in the Solomon Islands is a new thing. Do those that argue against kava growing outside its traditional range refuse to buy Solomon Islands kava? Currently, there are very few farmers in Hawaii that are growing enough kava that you could call it commercial, but all of them that I know of are haole. So does a white farmer who moved to Hamakua from Ohio six years ago get a pass because he's growing kava on Hawaiian land?

It's a complicated subject and there's nothing black and white about it...

 

[Kojo Douglas]

The question of who kava belongs to is an interesting one. It may have started in PNG, really blew up with the Ni-Vans. Made it much later to Hawaii. Ni-Vans are definitely not Polynesian. They have different lineages, yet we don't tell Hawaiians they shouldn't grow kava. Kava growing in the Solomon Islands is a new thing. Do those that argue against kava growing outside its traditional range refuse to buy Solomon Islands kava? Currently, there are very few farmers in Hawaii that are growing enough kava that you could call it commercial, but all of them that I know of are haole. So does a white farmer who moved to Hamakua from Ohio six years ago get a pass because he's growing kava on Hawaiian land?

Well said Judd. This is exactly my point.

 

[Kojo Douglas]

That is a lot of question throwing off from the main point.

Kava should remain on the islands for as long as possible. I do think there will become a time where kava becomes more popular that to even sustain cultural usage in the islands people could be out priced. That would be my biggest fear with kava staying only on the islands. But that has a decent ways to go and there is more capacity to fulfill more kava.

Why shouldn't the farmers depend on kava as there economic development? The villages that farm kava have been doing it there whole life. And the funds that kava can bring them can lead to more chances for economic development for the farmers and villages.

To answer you last question that would depend on the ethics of the exporter. I know some exporters wish to bring water and electricity to rural areas so people can have better quality of life with better sanitation standards. There is also pricing minimums that must be paid to the farmers.

The only thing holding back kava is there is no "formal organization" holding the rights. If kava was somehow just cultivated today by a company like Monsanto they would patent it right?

I think Alia nailed it with is this more of a legal question or a moral one. And I would have to say it is more of a moral one. The Codex does define cultivars from the islands with a designation and if others grow kava they do not get this designation.

I see how it could be legal but should it be? because it definitely is not moral, and at the end of the day shouldn't it be the responsibility of developed nations to support developing nations?

Let’s be fair, I was the first to point out that there were red herrings. The questions I proposed here were logical outcomes of the main question - who should be allowed to grow and benefit from Kava?

 

[_byron]

Let’s be fair, I was the first to point out that there were red herrings. The questions I proposed here were logical outcomes of the main question - who should be allowed to grow and benefit from Kava?

Red herrings or not they still relate to the moral question of where kava should be grown.

I really want to point out I am not trying to say it will never or could never happen. I am at no authority to speak here and neither is most of us here.

That being said I do think kava will eventually be moved of the islands and be grown in other regions like wine, but my main opposition is kava from the pacific islands has not reached it maximum potential and that should be considered first imo.

 

[Kojo Douglas]

Absolutely the Pacific Islands will always be the homeland. Going with the wine analogy, the best wine is grown and bottled where it was perfected.

 

[Henry]

Lots of good points here.
Ni-Vanuatu are wise in their efforts to safeguard their rare and unique cultivars, but I think concerns about some other kava being grown elsewhere by new players (eg Solomon Islands) are overblown. Maybe people dont give Vanuatu kava enough credit.

Vanuatu is well placed to always offer a premium product. By law all kava grown in Vanuatu is (at least in theory) organic, the islands have some of the best conditions to grow fine kava and they have the range of cultivars, traditional knowledge and an amazingly attractive story/narrative to make them a unique source of kava. The biggest threat to Vanuatu kava brand (and kava in general) are low quality, poorly processed and unsanitary kava exports. I think that those who export low quality stuff would likely lose against lower cost competition from Indonesia, Phillipines etc as these places could grow larger quantities while maintaining some consistant basic quality standard (in part due to chemical usage). But no way good,clean Vanuatu kava that is properly processed would be threatened by such new competitors.
Just like it is not currently threatened by low quality and cheaper kava grown elsewhere around the Pacific.

Also, lets not forget that it's not just about the plants. Vanuatu already has at least one processor with so much technical know-how, years of experience and state of the art facilities. Some people have been doing some serious work and research in Vanuatu and there is A LOT of value that gets added to kava. Even if someone grew it a bit cheaper in Indonesia, it's not likely they could easily process it as well as some of the very experienced processors on the islands who are already years ahead and growing.

What the current revolution in coffee suggests is that far from being swept away by lower price, traditional growers (Ethiopia etc) can stand to benefit a lot from a bigger, more mature market.

 

[_byron]

Lots of good points here.
Ni-Vanuatu are wise in their efforts to safeguard their rare and unique cultivars, but I dont think the whole Vanuatu kava industry should be concerned by new players (eg Solomon Islands) entering the scene.

Vanuatu is well placed to always offer a premium product. By law all kava grown in Vanuatu is (at least in theory) organic, the islands have some of the best conditions to grow fine kava and they have the range of cultivars, traditional knowledge and attractive story to make them a unique source of kava. The biggest threat to Vanuatu kava brand (and kava in general) is poor quality, unsanitary, low quality kava exports. I think that those who export low quality stuff would likely lose against lower cost competition from Indonesia, Phillipines etc as these places could grow larger quantities while maintaining some consistant basic quality standard (in part due to chemical usage). But no way good,clean Vanuatu kava that is properly processed would be threatened by such new competitors.
Just like it is not currently threatened by low quality and cheaper kava grown elsewhere around the Pacific.

Also, lets not forget that it's not just about the plants. Vanuatu already has at least one processor with so much technical know-how, years of experience and state of the art facilities. People have been doing some serious work and research in the existing producer countries and there is A LOT of value that gets added to kava. Even if someone grew it a bit cheaper in Indonesia, it's not likely they could easily process it as well as some of the very experienced processors on the islands who are already years ahead and growing.

What the current revolution in coffee suggests is that far from being swept away by lower price, traditional growers (Ethiopia etc) can stand to benefit a lot from a bigger, more mature market.

Don't you think if the general public was first introduced to kava grown in Venezuela or whatever non original place they would not be as interested in consuming it again vs if they tried it from the islands? I just think that kava should "blow up" with kava grown where it is from now. Most people in the U.S. still do not know about kava. If kava was grown other places and priced way cheaper the public would not get the proper introduction and may just pass on kava as if it was low grade kava and felt like another "snake oil" dietary supplement. I mean that kind of is already a problem today with most people understanding kava as a pill or in a tea bag and we do not support those.

To the point with coffee I literally just learned right now about coffee originated in Ethiopia. I would hope if kava got moved out of the islands it would be more known or maybe I am just showing my lack of coffee knowledge lol. I googled it and found it is 3% of the total coffee in the world which is 7th highest. Which is not that bad I guess considering coffees popularity. But kavas popularity is so much less that so it is not comparable for now.

Maybe I am wrong I just raise these points as this is a very complicated subject that does deserve discussion (Maybe should leave it up to the governments though ahah)

 

[Plantacious]

What about some other Pacific Islands, we never hear about growing kava ?
Like Guam, for example
Do they, or can they, grow kava there ?

 

[_byron]

Fair points I'm not trying to start an argument I only want to raise points as to why kava should stay in the islands.

Stating again I do think kava will have to be grown outside of the area it is now but why not develop the countries that grow kava first.

Do you personally believe if kava was grown outside of the pacific islands it would benefit them more? or less? Compared to if they kept it to themselves until it was a larger industry.

 

[Henry]

Fair points I'm not trying to start an argument I only want to raise points as to why kava should stay in the islands.

Stating again I do think kava will have to be grown outside of the area it is now but why not develop the countries that grow kava first.

Do you personally believe if kava was grown outside of the pacific islands it would benefit them more? or less? Compared to if they kept it to themselves until it was a larger industry.

I think it would be largely irrelevant for the pacific kava industry as a whole, but might hurt low quality producers and benefit top quality ones. This is mainly bc kava grown elsewhere wouldnt be a competition for artisanal/fine kava, but might be a competition for kava grown for extract makers and those who export it as a generic "kava kava" type filler.

 

[Henry]

speaking of Ethiopian coffee,one of our forum members sells some of the world's finest coffee (much of it from Ethiopia) out of his Melbourne roastery. Seriously crazy good. If anyone here is in Aussie, you must try it.

 

[Orz[EST]]

Perhaps kava requires certain set of microorganisms (endophytes) or lack of certain pathogens, who knows?

 

[Michael Nielsen]

When people hear the word kava they think about the spanish sparkling wine called cava

 

[Jacob Bula]

When people hear the word kava they think about the spanish sparkling wine called cava

This^. My co-worker visited Nashville a few weeks ago and saw a restaurant called "Cava". He took a picture of it and said he thought about me when he saw it.

 

[Jacob Bula]

You can't trademark nature and that's how it should remain.

 

[Plantacious]

You can't trademark nature and that's how it should remain.

True, but is GMO natural ?

 

[Jacob Bula]

True, but is GMO natural ?

I was talking about non-GMO, which is really a false-term as everything is genetically modified. Nature makes selections over millions of years-- Modern GMO is just human selection on a shorter time-scale, which isn't inherently bad. I don't have an issue with scientists who have spent millions in R&D having a patent on something that is a modern GMO. GMO is a tool-- it can be used for good or evil. Creating larger, more pest and drought resistant food that can feed a larger population->Good. Monsanto creating seeds that are sterile so you can't plant them and are forced to buy theirs over again-> Bad.