US Government Claims Release of Information on Chinese Mystery Seeds Would Compromise Years-Long Investigation

One of the great mysteries of the early days of the pandemic involved “Chinese mystery seeds,” a much-reported-on phenomenon in which Americans began receiving plant seeds in the mail from Chinese addresses, which in turn stirred something of a media frenzy.

Motherboard—through the use of a public records request blitz sent to all 50 states and a series of federal agencies—was the first to report that many of these mystery seeds were not mysterious at all: They were seeds that people had ordered, forgotten about, and then panicked about anyway. The rest were likely part of “brushing” campaigns, fraudulent schemes in which Amazon sellers mail cheap physical products to people so that the sellers can masquerade as “verified buyers” and post positive reviews of the products.

The mystery of the Chinese mystery seeds has thus largely been solved by journalists. (We highly recommend the UnderUnderstood podcast episode about this phenomenon.)

And yet the United States Department of Agriculture’s Office of Inspector General just denied Motherboard’s two-and-a-half-year-old Freedom of Information Act request because, it says, it is still conducting an active investigation into the mystery seeds and releasing any information about them would possibly interfere with those efforts.

“The information you requested pertains to an ongoing inquiry and all records are therefore exempt from mandatory disclosure,” a lawyer for the USDA’s OIG wrote. “To release any information at this time could interfere with the ability of personnel to develop relevant evidence and may jeopardize the inquiry.”

The news shows that the USDA is still investigating the mystery seeds, despite the agency’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service publishing the results of, seemingly, a completely separate investigation into the seeds on February 18, 2021, more than two years ago. That investigation stated unequivocally that “APHIS has found no evidence that someone was intentionally trying to harm U.S. agriculture with these shipments. In fact, there is no correlation between where the seeds were sent and U.S. critical agriculture infrastructure. APHIS officials believe the unsolicited packages are part of an internet ‘brushing scam.’”

At the moment it is entirely unclear how the Office of Inspector General’s investigation differs from the APHIS investigation, though it is worth noting that OIGs are quasi-independent from the agencies they investigate, and that they often—but not always—investigate malfeasance within specific government agencies.

This response highlights how deeply broken the FOIA can be and often is. Our initial request was filed on August 5, 2020. The FOIA statute states that federal agencies have 20 business days to respond to FOIA requests. Anyone who has ever filed such a request knows that this deadline is almost never hit by federal agencies, and that there is little to nothing a requester can do to force the government to comply with the statute. State and local response times under state freedom of information laws vary greatly but are usually faster.

Here are excerpts from the full series of communications we received from the USDA’s OIG over the course of nearly three years:

Sept. 3, 2020:

“Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, we estimate that OIG’s response to your request will be completed by November 30, 2020. There are still requests ahead of yours in the queue and we process requests on a first-in, first-out basis.”

Dec. 7, 2020:

“This is to provide you with a status update regarding Log No. 20-00096. In view of USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, we estimate that your request will be completed by February 26, 2021.”

Feb. 10, 2021:

“This is to provide you with a status update regarding Log No. 20-00096. Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, processing is taking longer than anticipated. Therefore, we estimate that your request will be completed by May 28, 2021.”

May 14, 2021:

“This is to provide you with a status update regarding Log No. 20-00096. Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, processing is taking longer than anticipated. Therefore, we estimate that your request will be completed by September 30, 2021.”

Sept. 22, 2021:

“This is to provide you with a status update regarding Log No. 20-00096. Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, processing is taking longer than anticipated. Therefore, we estimate that your request will be completed by May 2, 2022.”

April 5, 2022:

“This is to provide you with an additional status update requested regarding Log No. 20-00096. Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, processing is continuing to take longer than anticipated. Therefore, we estimate that your request will be completed by September 30, 2022.”

Aug. 29, 2022:

“This is to provide you with a status update regarding Log No. 20-00096. Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, processing is taking longer than anticipated. Therefore, we estimate that your request will be completed by October 31, 2022.”

Nov. 7, 2022:

“This is to provide you with a status update regarding Log No. 20-00096. Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, processing is taking longer than anticipated. Therefore, we estimate that your request will be completed by December 8, 2022.”

Jan. 6, 2023:

“This is to provide you with a status update regarding Log No. 20-00096. Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, processing is taking longer than anticipated. Therefore, we estimate that your request will be completed by February 8, 2023.”

Feb. 10, 2023:

“This is to provide you with a status update regarding Log No. 20-00096. Due to the USDA OIG’s backlog of FOIA requests, processing is taking longer than anticipated. Therefore, we estimate that your request will be completed before March 8, 2023.”

Feb 28, 2023:

“Please see the attached FOIA response regarding Log No. 20-00096.”

The attached document, of course, said that our FOIA request had been denied. It added, however, that we are free to start the process all over again once this nebulous and perhaps interminable investigation was complete: “Once the matter has closed, you may make another request and we will process the records as appropriate under FOIA law.”