Alaska Grown dispute hurtful to state ag industry

Can there a be a winner in the Alaska Grown lawsuit?

No matter how Superior Judge Jack Smith rules after the latest court hearing Wednesday, Alaska’s agricultural industry has been battered and bruised by the lingering, bitter wrangling over which entity owns the right to use the Alaska Grown logo on wearables.

The dispute has divided Alaska’s agricultural community like few issues could or have. It pits the area of state government dedicated to promoting and aiding agriculture against a segment of the industry.

This tug-of-war between the Mat-Su Chapter of the Alaska Farm Bureau and the state Division of Agriculture contorts the logo, cooperatively designed to help promote the Alaska agricultural industry.

How can this happen? In a state where the agricultural community is so small that everybody literally does know everybody, thousands of dollars are being wasted in an effort to thwart a group that shares the state’s common goal.

To ask either side of the dispute this question opens the floodgates, releasing bitter acrimony that has become the fruit borne of this conflict. Efforts to negotiate, arbitrate and conciliate have failed. They have failed because neither side trusts the other.

The state points to its offer to allow the local Farm Bureau Chapter to operate in a status quo — sell Alaska Grown logo wearables as it has for some 20 years. The chapter was prepared to sign such an agreement earlier this year, but backed out because the state wanted to allow the logo to be used by any group, not just those using the proceeds to promote Alaska agriculture.

The state says the chapter wants to hog the logo for itself; the chapter says it is simply trying to protect it from knockoff sellers and will happily share it with others that promote Alaska agriculture. Despite this recent history of suspicion and finger-pointing, there is still time for the state and the chapter to come up with an agreement and ask for the blessing of the judge.

Try this:

1. The state should be designated as the caretaker of the logo. There is no agricultural organization with the ability to police the real use of the logo, which is labeling Alaska Grown food products. Because that is the primary purpose of the logo, the sanctity of that use supersedes ancillary promotions, like shirts.

2. As caretaker, the state should allow use of the logo for promotional goods so long as that use directly benefits Alaska agriculture. This would mean any organization or business willing to put the proceeds back into the industry would be allowed to sell the wearables. This would likely mean your average retail store would not be interested in selling promotional items with the Alaska Grown logo, but we are confident that will not have an adverse effect on the state or its economy.

3. As caretaker, the state would monitor these sellers to be sure they are living up to this standard. Those that do not would lose their licensing agreement.

4. A group of farmers, agricultural industry officials and state representatives, with the help of the judge as necessary, should draw up a list of allowable uses for funds generated. The effort needs to become cooperative, as it was when the logo was developed.

Alaska Grown is about promoting an industry that desperately needs the help. It’s time to put the Alaska Grown label on a new agreement that shows a new spirit of cooperation.