Who Owns Breeding Value? Inside the WBNUJS Discussion on Animal and Fish Rights

Last year, India had a production of 197.75 lakh tonnes of fish. Exports of seafood reached ₹62,408 crore. Livestock now makes up 31% of farm GVA. These are not petty figures, and behind all of these stands a question that no one has adequately answered: Who is the legal owner of a superior animal or fish breed?

No one does at the moment. The patents act of India does not allow patents on animals and plants and therefore breeders safeguard their efforts by using contracts, trade secrets and process patents instead of a clean right of ownership. That works only up to a point.

The issue was exacerbated by the fact that breeding became high-tech. Genomic selection, sex-sorted semen, and transfer of embryos on a scale are already employed by NDDB. 

Where one government program comes up with a better cow, and a private company then makes money off that line, the law does not provide an easy method to determine who owes what to whom.

This was stated directly in the WBNUJS symposium in April 2026: in the absence of a framework, the traditional breeders receive nothing as intermediaries appropriate the value. In 2025 Bihar enacted a breeding registration law. 

In March 2026, the bovine breeding law of Tamil Nadu won a court battle. The 2024 treaty by WIPO now obligates patent applicants to reveal the origin of genetic material.

The trend is evident. India is shifting to a licensing and traceability system, rather than ownership. The aim is to preserve genetic heritage without shutting down the doors to investment. Finding that balance is important to 30 million fisheries people alone.