FRANCE LOBBIES STATE OFFICIALS ON GEOGRAPHIC INDICATION

UNCLAS PARIS 001173

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

SIPDIS

BRUSSELS PASS USEU FOR AGMINCOUNSELOR
STATE FOR OES; EUR/ERA;
STATE PASS USTR FOR MURPHY;
USDA/OS/JOHANNS/TERPSTRA;
USDA/FAS FOR OA/YOST; LA/CHURCH;
OCRA/CURTIS
ONA/RIEMENSCHNEIDER
FAA/YOUNG;
EU POSTS PASS TO AGRICULTURE AND ECON
GENEVA FOR USTR, ALSO AGRICULTURE

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR ETRD EU FR
SUBJECT: FRANCE LOBBIES STATE OFFICIALS ON GEOGRAPHIC INDICATION

REF: (A) 2007 State 15811


1. Summary : On March 9 to 13, the Government of France (GOF)
invited four state agricultural officials to France to convince them
that France's approach to the Geographic Indications (GI) Issue
could benefit their constituencies as well. Agricultural officials
from Nebraska, South Dakota, Texas and Vermont were exposed to the
French GI system, its impact on various agricultural operations and
its perceived benefits for agricultural producers. Officials from
the French Embassy in WashDC including Christian Berger, the French
Agricultural Counselor, accompanied the group. Prior to their
arrival, the FAS office in Paris provided the four officials with
background information on the U.S. position on the G.I. issue. End
Summary


2. The delegation included Greg Ibach, Director of the Nebraska
Department of Agriculture, Secretary Larry Gabriel of the South
Dakota Department of Agriculture, Commissioner Todd Stapples from
the Texas Department of Agriculture and Secretary Roger Allbee from
the Vermont Department of Agriculture.


3. The State delegation visited several regions in France, including
Champagne, Poitou Charente (where cognac is produced) and Ile de Re
which produces potatoes.


4. The visit in Champagne was used to lobby the State officials on
the use of semi-generic names for wines in the United States. Future
advertising campaigns by French Champagne producers in the United
States were shown to the delegation, clearly asserting that the only
legitimate champagne is that produced in the Champagne region of
France.


5. The GOF intention was clearly to make the State officials more
sympathetic to France's position on GIs. French officials stressed
the benefits for farmers such as higher price and less competition
from similar products without the GI. They also stressed that the
French GI system is supported by producers themselves as well as by
local communities and that the State only intervenes as a guarantor
of the rules.


6. Finally, French officials openly encouraged the idea of creating
GI systems at the state level in the United States: they mentioned
that France and the European Union would be happy to protect GIs on
American products such as Vermont maple syrup, South Dakota beef or
Idaho potatoes, should U.S. producers of those products apply for GI
protection in Europe. They also stated that Napa Valley wine
producers had applied for GI protection in France to help defend
their label against Chinese counterfeiting.


7. The group saw the value of the GI system in France. They seemed
to recognize that, while adopting such a system could have
advantages for their producers, it could also pose threats (i.e.
losing the ability to use certain names such as cheddar cheese). At
a dinner with the Institute for Appellation of Origin, Secretary
Allbee pointed out the problems that might arise, should a GI system
be included in WTO trade negotiations.


8. Comment : This effort as well as France's frequent courting of
African Ag Ministers and farm leaders, indicate that the GOF is
willing to dedicate significant resources in order to try to build
support for its negotiating positions in multilateral fora.

Stapleton