(Beyond Pesticides, October 7, 2008) After months of grassroots pressure by the Genetic Engineering Policy Project, Center for Food Safety and others, Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 541, The Food and Farm Protection Act, on September 27, 2008. Under this law, farmers that are unknowingly contaminated by genetically engineered (GE) crops in California are now protected from liability. Monsanto, which has aggressively litigated to protect its seed patents, must now use a protocol to investigate farmers and sample their crops under legal standards that require notification. “We’re pleased to see that this bill will give farmers new protections from legal implications related to GE crops,” said Rebecca Spector, West Coast Director for Center for Food Safety. “While it is a compromise, it’s still an important step in the right direction.” AB 541 protects California farmers who have not been able to prevent the inevitable – the drift of GE pollen or seed onto their land and the subsequent contamination of non-GE crops. Farmers with crops that become contaminated by patented seeds or pollen have been the target of lawsuits brought by biotech patent holders, most notably Monsanto. Further, if their contaminated crops cause harm to other farmers, the environment or consumers, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, September 4, 2008) On September 2, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a nationwide ban on the planting of genetically-engineered (GE) Roundup Ready alfalfa pending a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Court determined that the planting of genetically modified alfalfa can result in potentially irreversible harm to organic and conventional varieties of crops, damage to the environment, and economic harm to farmers. Beyond Pesticides is a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit. Although the suit (Geertson Seed Farms, et al. v. Johanns) was brought against U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Forage Genetics and Monsanto entered into the suit as Defendant-Intervenors. In her opinion, Circuit Judge Mary M. Schroeder held that, “Monsanto and Forage Genetics contend that the District Court disregarded their financial losses, but the district court considered those economic losses and simply concluded that the harm to growers and consumers who wanted non-genetically engineered alfalfa outweighed the financial hardships to Monsanto and Forage Genetics and their growers.” “This ruling affirms a major victory for consumers, ranchers, organic farmers, and most conventional farmers across the country,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety, lead plaintiff and counsel in the lawsuit. […]

(Beyond Pesticides, August 21, 2008) As the debate over how to solve the global food crisis heats up, experts criticize many in the mainstream media for promoting pesticides and genetically engineered seeds as solutions to global hunger. In a recent critique, Francis Moore Lappe, author of the famous book Diet for a Small Planet and co-founder of Food First and the Small Planet Institute, says the media, in this case NPR, are off the mark in identifying the underlying causes of the food crisis and fail to look at the hopeful stories of farming communities that are succeeding with agro-ecological methods. Ms. Lappe writes, “On every continent one can find empowered rural communities developing GM-free, agro-ecological farming systems. They’re succeeding: the largest overview study, looking at farmers transitioning to sustainable practices in 57 countries, involving almost 13 million small farmers on almost 100 million acres, found after four years that average yields were up 79 percent.” As an example, she points to what may be the “pesticide capital of the world,” Andhra Pradesh, India,where “pests developed insecticide resistance and genetically modified (GM) cotton failed to live up to Monsanto’s promises.” After significant crop losses and farmer suicides there, many communities […]

(Beyond Pesticides, July 9, 2008) High food prices, climate change and increasing concern over fresh water supplies are helping to fuel interest in new genetically modified (GM) technology in the European Union (EU), which has long been wary of foods derived from tinkering with the genetic make-up of plants. The European Commission has said it believes GM crops can alleviate the current crisis in food supply, although it added in June that expediency should not overrule strict scientific scrutiny of the use of GM technology. A European Commission-sponsored Eurobarometer opinion poll last month showed a slight increase in knowledge and acceptance of the technology. New consumer interests in GM seed varieties, which are likely to be more resistant to drought and able to produce reasonable yields with significantly less water, have increased. In a similar opinion poll conducted in March, the number of EU respondents saying they lacked information on GMs fell to 26 percent, compared with 40 percent in the previous, 2005 survey.  Fifty-eight percent were apprehensive about GM use and just 21 percent in favor, down from 26 percent in favor in a 2006. The European Union has not approved any GM crops for a decade and the […]

(Beyond Pesticides, June 5, 2008) While the Food and Agriculture Organization’s (FAO) High Level Conference on Food Security in Rome convenes June 3-5, 2008, some nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are trying to shed light on the fact that as hundreds of millions of people throughout the world are hungry, agrochemical companies that make pesticides and genetically engineered seeds are making record profits. Although UN chief Ban Ki-moon has declared the summit a success with “a clear sense of resolve, shared responsibility and political commitment among member states to making the right policy choices and investing in agriculture in the years to come,” many NGOs fear that the policies will only continue in the model of the green revolution, which ushered in the widespread use of pesticides and fertilizers in farming. This model favors large agrochemical companies that manufacture pesticides and genetically engineered seeds and perpetuates the environmental and social devastation that goes hand in hand with industrial agriculture. The Food Summit in Rome follows the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development (IAASTD) (also sponsored by the FAO) conference held in April of this year, which stressed the importance of agroecological and organic approaches to farming in order […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 14, 2008) After almost a year and a half of debate on genetically engineered (GE) crops, the Maine Legislature passed a bill last week to protect farmers from genetic trespass. According to Protect Maine Farmers, the bill prevents lawsuits for patent infringement against farmers who unintentionally end up with GE material in their crops; ensures lawsuits that do occur will be held in the state of Maine; and, directs the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources to develop and implement specific practices, or Best Management Practices, for growing GE crops. One component of the bill that was supported by many Maine farmers but failed would have required all businesses selling GE seeds in Maine to report their annual sales data to the Maine Commissioner of Agriculture. “Maine’s farmers now have some substantial assurance that if they save seed that has been contaminated by [GE] varieties, they are not at risk for a lawsuit,” states Logan Perkins, the lead organizer for Protect Maine Farmers. “Hopefully, the development of these Best Management Practices will give farmers the information they need to make good decisions about how to protect themselves, their livelihoods and their neighbors when using [GE] crops.” […]

(Beyond Pesticides, April 4, 2008) A study called “Long-term persistence of GM oilseed rape in the seedbank,” recently published in the journal Biology Letters, has found a genetically modified (GM) crop to persist in spite of a decade of efforts to remove it from a field. Researchers from Sweden’s Lund University and the Danish Technical University found GM oilseed rape (also known as canola) plants still growing ten years after seeds were planted. According to the study, the result contrasts previous trials: “In general, studies suggest that the majority of seeds disappear from the seedbank within two years.” The oilseed rape volunteer (rogue) plants were discovered by their resistance to the herbicide glufosinate. Researchers wrote, “This finding of volunteers, despite labour intensive control for 10 years [including intensive chemical spraying], supports previous suggestions that voulnteer oilseed rape needs to be carefully managed in order for non-GM crops to be planted after GM crops.” They added, “These results are important in relation to debating and regulating coexistence of GM and non-GM crops.” The study’s findings are consistent with previous research. A larger French study found similar survival of volunteer plants eight years after a GM trial. Swedish researcher Dr. Tina D’Hertefeldt […]

(Beyond Pesticides, March 26, 2008) The sowing of gene-altered corn, called MON810, in France this spring will not be allowed until further scientific evidence on its safety is reviewed. This ruling came after growers argued that they faced serious economic harm if the ban on genetically modified crops was not immediately released before the start of the spring planting season. The French Conseil d’État last week upheld the ban instituted February 7 of this year, after concerns were raised by French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, on the heath and environmental benefits of genetically modified (GM) crops. In the ruling, presiding Judge Jean-Marie Delarue pointed out that the safety of the product needs further study. The ban would therefore be upheld until a ruling could be made on the scientific underpinning. Hearings are expected to be held in the coming months. The French Ministry of Agriculture initially imposed the ban on GM products, stating that it should remain in place until European authorities completed a review of the product. Review is required every ten years. Efforts to overturn the ban were led by the General Association of Maize Growers in France and several biotechnology companies, including Monsanto, which engineered MON810, and Pioneer, […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 15, 2008) Two studies have just been released, one by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), a promoter of genetically-engineering crops,  and the other by the Center for Food Safety (CFS) and Friends of the Earth, each with differing conclusions on the impact of genetically engineered (GE) crops on the health of our food systems. The debate is one that has existed for years, particularly as GE seeds have spread worldwide, now accounting for 280 million acres of cropland in 23 countries. Reports have historically provided significant documentation of herbicide-resistant weeds developing as a result of heavy reliance on the chemicals crops are bred to tolerate. Insect resistance has also been recently discovered. Legislators have recognized the need to protect farmers from GE contamination and resulting lawsuits from seed developer Monsanto. Concerns over a litany of health and environmental risks from GE crops continue. The timing of these two studies highlights the disparity between how the GE industry represents its product and how public interest groups evaluate the effects and risks they see to farmers and consumers alike. The ISAAA study, entitled Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007, celebrates the first twelve […]

(Beyond Pesticides, February 14, 2008) Researchers have found what they are calling the first insect resistance in the field to genetically engineered plants that are modified to produce an insecticide called Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt. The University of Arizona (UA) researchers, who have previously received research support from Monsanto and Cotton, Inc., are supportive of bioengineered crops and dismiss the findings of resistance, given that they are only in cotton and no other crops. The report, “Insect resistance to Bt crops: evidence versus theory,” is due out in the February issue of Nature. Concern about resistance has raised fears in the organic community that Bt, derived from natural soil bacterium, would be rendered ineffective as insect resistance spreads and this natural control collapses over time.In organic systems, composted manures and cover crops replace synthetic fertilizers, innovative weeding strategies are used instead of herbicides, beneficial insects and trap crops control insect pests, and alternatives to toxic defoliants prepare plants for harvest. Bt-resistant populations of the insect bollworm, Helicoverpa zea, were found in more than a dozen crop fields in Mississippi and Arkansas between 2003 and 2006. The bollworm resistance to Bt cotton was discovered when a team of University of Arizona […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 24, 2008) The first state bill on genetically engineered (GE) crops passed through its first committee in February, 2007, and the latest revision is scheduled for a hearing tomorrow, January 24. While AB 541 has been pared down considerably from its first and most progressive incarnation, it includes two very important measures to protect farmers whose crops are contaminated by nearby GE fields. The first provision states, “A farmer is not liable for the breach of a seed contract or for patent infringement if a product, in which the seed labeler, or patent holder or licensee, has rights, is possessed by the farmer or found on real property owned or occupied by the farmer and the presence of the product is de minimis or not intended by the farmer.” A frequent criticism of Monsanto and the company’s overwhelming market share of seed is its tendency to sue farmers who did not plant GE seed, but whose fields were contaminated by a neighbor’s GE variety. In a 2005 report by the Center for Food Safety, Executive Director Andrew Kimbrell said, “These lawsuits and settlements are nothing less than corporate extortion of American Farmers.” (See Daily News from January […]

(Beyond Pesticides, January 8, 2008) Reclaiming Our Healthy Future: Political change to protect the next generation, the 26th National Pesticide Forum, will be held March 14-16 at the University of California, Berkeley. Register now to pay the pre-registration rate. James Roberts, M.D., associate professor of pediatrics at the Medical University of South Carolina and co-author of Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisonings, and Jim Riddle, outreach coordinator for the University of Minnesota Organic Ecology program, have recently been added to the program. Previously announced speakers include Arturo Rodriguez (UFW President), Devra Davis, Ph.D. (author and University of Pittsburgh professor of epidemiology) and Tyrone Hayes, Ph.D. (UC Berkeley professor of integrative biology). Also, actress Kaiulani Lee will perform A Sense of Wonder, her one-woman play based on the life and works of Rachel Carson. Session topics include: Children’s health and public policy; Farmworker justice, organizing and consumer action; Building just and healthy food systems; Power of local activism to influence political change; Pesticides and the secret history of the war on cancer; Skills training sessions; DDT and malaria; Global warming and biofuels; Biomonitoring and pesticide drift; Lawns and landscapes; Managing indoor environments; Water quality and much more. Jim Riddle is outreach […]

(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 […]