(Beyond Pesticides, January 3, 2008) The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has struck an arrangement with agribusiness giant Monsanto Co. that gives farmers in four states a break on federal crop insurance premiums if they plant a majority of Monsanto-brand seed corn this spring. Farmers in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa and Minnesota need to plant 75-80% of their crops with Monsanto’s (and only Monsanto’s) GM seeds to receive the “premium rate discount”. The arrangement has raised some eyebrows, particularly among organic farm groups that argue the government agency should not be promoting corn that promotes herbicide use; the Monsanto brands are resistant to Roundup (main ingredient, glyphosate) and contain chemicals that kill insects and other plants. Monsanto’s deal is legal, according to USDA officials, who point out that such arrangements were encouraged in a 2000 crop insurance passed by Congress. The idea is to give farmers a break on their insurance premiums if they use corn seeds that are higher yield and show resistance to insects and other threats. USDA officials said they are aware of the appearance of favoritism toward one of the nation’s largest agricultural companies. “We knew it would look that way,” said Shirley Pugh, a spokeswoman for […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 30, 2007) Seven years ago, the introduction of genetically modified (GM) sugar beets, along with other crops like potatoes and rice, was shelved at fears that consumers would not support their use. Sugar beets, which produce about half of the United States sugar (almost all of which is used domestically), are used in foods like candy, cereal, and baking products. The failure of the GM beet’s initial introduction was based on unwillingness from companies like Hershey and Kellogg to provoke consumer protests. Now, the marketplace seems to have changed enough that such big sugar-buying companies are less hesitant to buy Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” beet (which are tolerant of Roundup’s main ingredient, glyphosate). According to Kellogg spokeswoman Kris Charles, her company “would not have any issues” buying them because “most consumers are not concerned about biotech.” “Basically, we have not run into resistance,” said American Crystal Sugar president David Berg of the switch. “We really think that consumer attitudes have come to accept food from biotechnology.” Most other companies, including Hershey and Mars, are refusing to comment on the subject, which has kept these developments quiet until recently. Despite the corporate perception of public opinion on GM crops, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, November 2, 2007) According to figures released this week, genetically modified crops now cover 110,007 hectares of arable land across 7 European Union member states, an increase of more than 77 percent compared to last year, despite concerns from scientists and environmentalists. The figures show that the largest gains came from France, which quadrupled its cultivation, while Spain, the EU’s largest GM cultivator, saw increases of around 40 percent. Cultivation of GM crops also doubled in the Czech Republic and Germany. EuropaBio, the EU association for bioindustries, released the figures in advance of the Environmental Council meeting, which took place on October 30 to discuss proposals on GMO cultivation and import bans. “We are delighted to see that the uptake of biotech crops is growing despite the fact that only one product is available on the European market,” said Johan Vanhemelrijck, Secretary General of EuropaBio. He continued, “The cultivation of biotech plants is legally possible in all EU countries and we strongly urge policy makers in Europe to give all farmers the right to choose the products which they think are best to protect their crops and increase their competitiveness.” To date, the only type of GM crop […]

(Beyond Pesticides, October 16, 2007) Corn, genetically engineered (GE) to tolerate the pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), has been found to harm non-target aquatic insects and disrupt the connected food web. A new study by researchers at Indiana University, funded by the National Science Foundation and published in Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences, suggests that the crop, which has been licensed for use since 1996, poses an unforseen risk to aquatic ecosystems. According to the study, roughly 35 percent of American corn acreage is Bt corn. Pollen and other parts of the plants are travelling much farther than the fields in which they are planted, carrying Bt toxins through watersheds and being consumed by close relatives of the corn’s targeted pests. Caddisflies experience high mortality and stunted growth as a result of exposure. As researcher Todd V. Royer observed, they “are a food resource for higher organisms like amphibians and fish. And, if our goal is to have healthy, functioning ecosystems, we need to protect all the parts. Water resources are something we depend on greatly.” This effect went unnoticed for ten years because the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in its registration trials, tested Bt on a crustacean, rather […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 3, 2007) Maine is no longer the only state to prohibit the use of genetically altered corn. Despite concern from the organic farming community, Maine joined the rest of the nation last Friday when the Board of Pesticide Control (BPC) ruled to allow Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn to be grown and sold in the state of Maine. With the aim of reducing the use of hazardous pesticides, the BPC registered Bt corn products from Dow AgroSciences, Pioneer Hi-Bred International and Monsanto to be grown for animal feed. Bt corn is genetically modified to produce its own pesticide, a naturally occurring toxin that protects against a combination of insects. Organic growers caution that overuse of the crop will lead to insect resistance to the Bt toxin, which is widely sprayed on organic crops. “I think it might very well be a short-term solution and farmers will be forced to use more pesticides in the future,” said Board member Lee Humphreys, a market gardener. She warned that there are too many unknowns about the genetically modified corn, such as its long-term effect on the soil and in creating resistant bugs. In addition, the safety of consuming milk and beef […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 11, 2007) According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Economic Research Service, the number of genetically engineered (GE) crop acres by U.S. farmers has skyrocketed since their introduction in 1996, despite resistance from consumers and concerns about agricultural and environmental impacts. Because the U.S. does not require GE crops to be labeled, the only way to be sure you are not consuming these products is to buy organic, which forbids the use of GE technologies. Soybeans and cotton genetically engineered with herbicide-tolerant traits have been the most widely and rapidly adopted GE crops in the U.S., followed by insecticide-incorporated cotton and corn. The chart below shows the growth of GE soybeans, cotton and corn since 1996. (HT = modified to be herbicide tolerant, Bt = modified to produce the insecticide Bt) Since 2000, use of HT soybeans has increased from 54% of acreage planted with the crop to 91% in 2007. GE corn varieties, both HT and Bt, have increased from 25% to 73%. Cotton varieties, both HT and Bt, have increased from 61% to 87%. In addition to the lack of information available on the long-term safety of GE products, Beyond Pesticides is concerned with […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 11, 2007) Scientists from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) have discovered a gene that enables crops to tolerate being sprayed with dicamba. Citing previous experience with glyphosate resistant crops, environmentalists are concerned that this will increase use of a toxic herbicide while negatively impacting health and the environment. This new gene expands the range of genetically engineered (GE) crops available to farmers. The most popular are currently marketed as “Roundup Ready,” or tolerant of glyphosate, by Monsanto Company The discovery is being touted as a way to provide another option in areas where weeds have built up a resistance to glyphosate. Indeed, biochemist Don Weeks, who headed the UNL team, said, “Importantly, we think that this technology will help to extend the lifetime of the Roundup Ready technology. Some Roundup-resistant weeds have emerged in recent years, but working dicamba products into a weed-control strategy with Roundup could help counter that trend and lead to more complete weed control.” In fact, the dicamba-ready technology could appear in fields as part of a “stacked” seed, which is tolerant to both glyphosate and dicamba. Said Mr. Weeks, “It is highly likely that [Monsanto] would stack our gene with the Roundup […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 09, 2007) In a precedent-setting decision last week, Judge Charles Breyer ordered a complete environmental review of Monsanto’s genetically-altered alfalfa, making a final ruling that the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) 2005 approval of Monsanto’s genetically engineered (GE) “Roundup Ready” alfalfa was illegal. The judge called on USDA to ban any further planting of the GE seed until it conducts a complete Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In the decision, Judge Breyer in the Federal Northern District of California affirmed his preliminary ruling, which echoed the Center for Food Safety (CFS), Beyond Pesticides and other co-plaintiffs’ arguments in their lawsuit against USDA, that the crop could harm the environment and contaminate natural alfalfa. The ruling also requires Forage Genetics to provide the locations of all existing Roundup Ready alfalfa plots to USDA within 30 days. Judge Breyer ordered USDA to make the location of these plots “publicly available as soon as practicable” so that growers of organic and conventional alfalfa “can test their own crops to determine if there has been contamination.” “This permanent halt to the planting of this risky crop is a great victory for the environment,” said Will Rostov, a senior attorney for CFS. “Roundup […]

(Beyond Pesticides, May 1, 2007) More than a month after ordering a temporary halt to sales of genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa seeds, federal district court judge Charles Breyer is considering making the ban permanent, at least until the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) completes a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that confirms the seeds’ safety. (See Daily News of March 14 for Judge Breyer’s reasoning for siding against Monsanto’s team of lawyers, who were arguing that an EIS is unnecessary.) On why he was reluctant to reauthorize the planting of the GE crop, Breyer said, “It is not the court’s function to do an environmental impact study. That hasn’t been done, and I don’t know if the court ought to do it. The government ought to do it, and that is what I held.” Arguments by industry lawyers emphasized their belief that there is very little likelihood of damage being done by the GE alfalfa. Monsanto, which developed the seeds marketed as “Roundup Ready,” argued that there is an “extremely low risk” of conventional crops being contaminated, providing “appropriate stewardship measures” are taken. Monsanto Lawyer Janice Schneider even said, “There are some significant environmental and beneficial effects in Roundup […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 14, 2007) On March 12, a federal judge ruled that the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) 2005 approval of genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa is vacated and ordered an immediate halt to sales of the GE seed. The judge’s ruling follows a hearing held last week in the case brought by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) against USDA for approving GE alfalfa without conducting the required Environmental Impact Statement. In a press release issued by CFS, Will Rostov, senior attorney said, “We are pleased that the judge called for halt to sales of this potentially damaging crop.” Mr. Rostov continued, “Roundup Ready alfalfa poses threats to farmers, to our export markets, and to the environment. We expect the USDA to abide by the law and give these harmful effects of the crop full consideration.” The preliminary injunction ordered by Judge Charles Breyer in the Federal Northern District of California follows his ruling last month, finding that USDA violated national environmental laws by approving GE alfalfa without a full Environmental Impact Statement. In addition to barring seed sales, the injunction calls for a March 30, 2007, halt to planting of GE alfalfa by farmers who have already purchased […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 7, 2007) On March 4, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) began a recall of a brand of long-grain rice seed because of possible contamination by genetically modified (GM) rice. The recall is one in a series of recent mishaps involving GM foods. The seed, known as Clearfield CL131, is manufactured by BASF Agricultural Products, a division of the world’s largest chemical company, BASF AG, and marketed by Horizon Ag. According to a USDA press release, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service administrator Ron DeHaven, D.V.M., states, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is taking action to prevent the planting and distribution of a long-grain rice seed known as Clearfield CL131 because testing by a private company has revealed the possible presence of trace levels of genetic material not yet approved for commercialization.” The release continues to explain, “On March 1, 2007, BASF notified USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of independent laboratory test findings on 2005 CL131 registered rice seed . . . suggesting the presence of an unidentified and possibly regulated GM event.” In addressing this possibility, Dr. DeHaven states, “APHIS is conducting an investigation to determine […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 26, 2007) The United States’ largest dairy company, Dean Foods, has adopted a policy statement rejecting milk from cloned cows. The decision, which joins those of the organic dairy community to reject animal cloning, reflects the publics’ demand for foods free of genetic manipulation and chemicals. The food giant’s policy comes in the midst of the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) open comment period on its evaluation of the safety of animal cloning. While FDA is expected to determine animal products from clones are as safe as those from naturally produced animals, Dean Foods’ stance is a clear message that the market is not interested in purchasing them. The statement reads: “Based on the desire of our customers and consumers, Dean Foods will not accept milk from cows that have been cloned. If the FDA does approve the sale of milk from cloned cows, we will work with our dairy farmers to implement protocols to ensure that the milk they supply to Dean Foods does not come from cloned cows. “The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is expected to conclude that milk from cloned cows is safe. Our decision not to accept this milk is based […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 15, 2007) On February 13, a U.S. District judge ruled that the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) violated federal environmental law by failing to conduct an environmental impact statement (EIS) on genetically engineered (GE) alfalfa seeds before deregulating them in 2005. Ruling on a lawsuit brought by environmental and farming groups, including Beyond Pesticides, Sierra Club and Center for Food Safety, Judge Charles R. Breyer found that USDA did not adequately defend its decision to forgo an EIS, while validating a number of the plaintiffs’ arguments. Alfalfa is the U.S.’s fourth-largest crop, and third most valuable. GE alfalfa seeds, primarily marketed by Monsanto as Roundup Ready, are engineered with a gene that causes them to be resistant to glyphosate. Among the plaintiffs’ concerns are contamination and cross-pollination between GE and natural crops, which can occur at a distance of up to two miles. Judge Beyer wrote, “Such gene transmission is especially likely in this context given the geographic concentration of alfalfa seed production.” He continued, “For those farmers who choose to grow non-genetically engineered alfalfa, the possibility that their crops will be infected with the engineered gene is tantamount to the elimination of all alfalfa; they […]