Agnet Dec. 12/03 -- II
Facts put
Hawaii biotech issues in perspective
GM trials
show evidence of co-existence
University
of California Davis wins $10 million in grants for genetic research
WA may adopt
GM crops ban
Big rush
expected on GM crops bill submissions
Environmentalists
accuse the government of flouting own rules
Scientists
seek aid to fight cactus moth
Residents
question ash cutting: Feds say pest threat may be worst on record
how to subscribe
Facts
put Hawaii biotech issues in perspective
December 9, 2003
Hawaii Reporter
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?30b53974-5530-40e3-86fa-22d1b6da9082
Via AgBioView at www.agbioworld.org
Rick Klemm, executive director of HARTS Hawaii, an agricultural trade
alliance, which includes member companies engaged in agricultural
biotechnology in Hawaii, writes in this story that we may live in the middle of
the Pacific Ocean, but misstatements and misperceptions are not confined to our
shores. In recent weeks, journalists from around the world have come to Hawaii
to learn the facts about our biotechnology industry. They have heard the
concerns raised by anti-biotechnology groups on the islands, and they came here
to get the story for themselves.
Klemm says that the USDA's Foreign Agriculture Service, which helped to arrange
the visits, was eager for the journalists to hear the truth about Hawaiian
papaya, which is one of biotechnology's greatest success stories.
Anti-biotech activists, including some in Hawaii's organic farm industry, have
been fostering fears that pollen from virus-resistant biotech papayas is a
threat to any organic papayas that might be grown and sold into foreign markets.
Actually, the opposite is the truth. There would be no papaya sales at all --
organic or non-organic -- were it not for biotechnology. Ringspot virus
essentially wiped out the papaya industry on the islands a few years ago. With
the aid of biotechnology, a virus-resistant papaya was introduced in 1998, and
the industry is, once again, thriving.
In addition, groves of virus-resistant papaya trees serve as buffers to help
keep the virus from spreading like wildfire to non-resistant organic and
conventional papaya trees.
Pollen flow is a non-issue with regard to determining the "organic"
status of a crop. Federally adopted organic standards do not prohibit the
unintended presence of biotech traits in organic foods. Zero presence is
something the organic industry has imposed on itself. Furthermore, even if
pollen were to flow to organic papaya trees, the fruit would still be free of
biotech genes, according to researchers at the University of Hawaii.
The edible part of a papaya fruit always has the same genetic makeup as the tree
that produces it. If a non-biotech tree were to be pollinated by a biotech
papaya tree, the seeds inside the non-biotech fruit might inherit the biotech
trait but not the flesh of the fruit that is eaten.
To ensure non-biotech papaya, organic farmers need only plant non-biotech seeds.
Farmers can take simple steps to ensure seed purity, according to the
university's horticulture department. If organic growers put a bag over unopened
flowers on conventionally bred papaya plants, the flowers will self-pollinate,
ensuring the purity of all seeds from that flower.
Papaya pollen is not the only pollen that has gotten a bum rap locally.
Responding to misinformation spread by anti-biotech activists, some people have
become concerned that pollen from crops grown by local seed companies might
spread to organic crops or even to native plants. About 95 percent of all the
biotech acres in Hawaii are planted in corn. Corn has no wild relatives in
Hawaii, so there is no opportunity for the biotech genes to spread into the
environment. Plants are not promiscuous and our fragile island environments are
safe.
There is not much chance for gene flow to non-biotech crops either. The Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) imposes restrictions on how
experimental crops can be grown. Wide barriers are required to minimize the
potential for pollen flow. Seed companies adhere to these barriers, not just to
prevent outflow to other crops, but to prevent neighboring hybrids from mingling
with their commercial hybrids. APHIS may require other measures as well, such as
detasseling, the bagging of tassels, or varying planting times so crops are not
all sexually compatible at the same time.
Hawaii is an important locale for seed companies and university biotech
researchers because of our favorable year-round climate, but anti-biotech
activists have overstated the extent of public and private biotech research.
According to records on the APHIS website, there have been only 466 requests for
experimental planting in Hawaii since January 2001. Only 125 permits and
notifications are still in effect or pending, and some will never be acted upon.
Although seed companies control about 8,000 acres in Hawaii, only about 3,500
were planted last year. Of those planted acres, only about 1,400 were planted in
biotech crops. The vast majority of those acres were planted with seeds that
already have been tested and approved by government regulators or are nearing
final approval after years of small-plot testing. Only a small number of acres
were planted in truly experimental trials, which typically consist of only one
or two rows of plants. Our islands are not overrun with biotech pollen, as
critics have claimed.
Hawaii's agricultural biotechnology industry is providing good jobs and income
for many island residents, especially in rural areas. The National Agricultural
Statistics Service estimates that island biotech companies last year contributed
$48.7 million to the state's economy.
This means purchases of goods and services, lease payments to landowners, jobs,
state and county tax revenues, and preservation of our precious green space.
Many people who lost their jobs when the sugar industry declined now are finding
work with biotech companies.
Just as foreign journalists wanted to get the facts, we hope our residents want
to know the facts, too, so they can weigh the importance of this industry to our
state.
GM
trials show evidence of co-existence
The full paper is available at http://www.isaaa.org/kc.
Via AgBioView at www.agbioworld.org
Evidence show that conventional and organic crops have co-existed with
genetically modified (GM) trial crops without any economic and commercial
problems. Also, the adventitious presence of GMOs were absent in conventional
and organic crops that were located near the transgenic crops. These were the
highlights of the recent study conducted by Graham Brookes and Peter Barfoot
entitled “Co-existence of GM and non GM arable crops: case study of the United
Kingdom.”
In this paper, Brookes and Barfoot examined the issue of co-existence of GM and
non-GM crops, focusing on the main arable crops grown in the UK. At present, no
GM crops are grown commercially in the UK, however 260 Farm Scale Evaluation
field trials (FSEs) have been conducted for the past three years for crops such
as oilseed rape, sugar beet and forage maize. These FSEs covered about 1,220
hectares (an annual average of 405 hectares) as compared to the 693,000 hectares
planted to the three crops previously mentioned, 99.76% of which is
conventionally produced and 0.24% is organic.
Lastly, the authors emphasized the importance of “context” and
“proportionality.” They considered it disproportionate and inequitable if
difficult GM crop stewardship conditions would be imposed to farms that might
wish to grow GM crops, even though they are not located near conventional or
organic crops. Thus, majority of the conventional farmers (99.76%) could be
discouraged from adopting a technology that could have farm level benefits
(yield gains, cost savings), and provide wider environmental gains (reduced
pesticide use, usage of more environmentally benign herbicides, reduced levels
of greenhouse gas emissions).
University
of California Davis wins million in grants for genetic research
December 12, 2003
Knight-Ridder Tribune
Mike Lee, The Sacramento Bee, Calif.
The U.S. National Science Foundation is, according to this story, pumping nearly
$10 million into research led by the University of California, Davis, to explore
how different genes affect the qualities of rice and wheat plants.
The two grants solidify the university's status as one of the nation's top
agriculture research schools and offer hope for farmers that lab work over the
next three years will unlock genetic secrets to problems such as disease or pest
susceptibility.
WA
may adopt GM crops ban
December 12, 2003
ABC News
The Western Australian Government could, according to this story, impose a
blanket ban on all commercially grown genetically-modified (GM) crops in the
State within months after changes to the legislation passed through State
Parliament.
The story says that Upper House MPs have accepted a report from a committee
chaired by Greens' MP Christine Sharp, which says there are major advantages for
WA if it can market its exports internationally as totally GM-free.
It recommended that the Minister for Agriculture adopt a gatekeeper approach to
GM crops to give certainty to WA farmers.
Dr Sharp says closing the gate now is the only way to ensure the State's crops
are not contaminated.
Big
rush expected on GM crops bill submissions
December 12, 2003
ABC News
Primary Industries and Resources South Australia (PIRSA) is expecting a
last-minute rush as farmers busy with harvest meet today's deadline for comment
on the draft genetically modified (GM) crops management bill.
PIRSA stratgegic policy director Peter Carr says about 40 submissions had been
received earlier this week.
He says he realises grain growers are under pressure, but they can be brief with
their comments.
Mr Carr says the South Australian Government could not delay the process because
the legislation must be in place before the coming sowing season.
Environmentalists
accuse the government of flouting own rules
December 10, 2003
Business Day
http://www.bday.co.za/bday/content/direct/1,3523,1503169-6078-0,00.html
CAPE TOWN (SAPA) -- Haidee Swanby, education officer at Biowatch SA (South
Africa) was cited as saying on Wednesday that the Department of Agriculture had
flouted its own rules by simultaneously awarding an international GMO seed
company the go ahead for field trials, and to commercially release the crop,
adding, "The simultaneous application by Syngenta for the authorisation of
field trials and general release does not meet basic practice procedures for
biosafety and undermines the primary purpose of field trials."
She was further cited as saying the dual application also violated the
environmental impact assessment provisions of the National Environmental
Management Act and was at odds with the objectives of South Africa's GMO
(Genetically Modified Organisms) Act.
Swanby said the point of informing the public through publishing public notices
was to allow for comments and objections.
Biowatch responded to Syngenta's public notices with comments and objections but
was not notified of the department's decision to grant approval, and lodged an
appeal against this decision.
Scientists
seek aid to fight cactus moth
December 12, 2003
Associated Press
PENSACOLA, Fla. -- A full-blown program to control the cactus moth would,
according to this story, cost millions of dollars, but scientists say they are
trying to scrape up just $100,000 for field testing an experimental technique
that may slow the invasive pest's advance.
The moth, a South American native, could wreak economic and environmental havoc
if it gets to the southwestern United States and Mexico, where it appears
headed. In 14 years the insect has marched across Florida from the Keys to the
western tip of the Panhandle, and it is picking up speed.
U.S. Department of Agriculture scientists at a meeting of cactus moth experts
this week in Miami were cited as reporting that releasing sterile males reduced
larvae by 80 percent in caged testing.
Residents
question ash cutting: Feds say pest threat may be worst on record
December 12, 2003
The Chatham Daily News
1 / Front
Ellwood Shreve
TILBURY -- Nothing is, according to this story, going to stop the Canadian Food
Inspection Agency from cutting down an estimated 70,000 ash trees in the West
Kent area this winter.
However, the CFIA has a tough sell convincing residents in the affected area --
10 kilometres wide between Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie -- that it is a
necessary measure to halt the spread of the emerald ash borer.
The pest has already infiltrated neighbouring Essex County and this measure is
viewed by the CFIA as the best way to prevent it from spreading throughout
Ontario and eventually across Canada.
Doubts about the plan filled the air during an open house Thursday afternoon at
Ryder Hall in Tilbury.
Ken Marchant, forestry specialist with the CFIA, was cited as saying that entire
provinces have been quarantined in the past to try to combat a pest, adding,
"we haven't ever tried to cut a swath of this size."
It is the seriousness of the ash borer that is prompting the CFIA to take such a
drastic measure.
"This may be the worst pest ever to hit Canada," Marchant said.
Agnet is produced by the Food Safety Network at
the University of Guelph and is sponsored by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture
and Food, Plants Program at the University of Guelph, Agricultural Adaptation
Council (CanAdapt Program), AGCare, Canadian Council of Grocery Distributors,
ConAgra Foods, Inc., Pioneer Hi-Bred Limited (Canada), Ag-West Biotech, Inc.,
Monsanto Canada, Meat and Livestock Australia, National Pork Board, Pew
Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Council for
Biotechnology Information, Canadian Animal Health Institute, Croplife Canada,
Syngenta Seeds Canada, Inc., Canadian Food Information Council, Saskatchewan
Agriculture, Food and Rural Revitalization, JIFSAN, National Cattlemen's Beef
Association, National Food Processors Association, Ontario Agri-Food
Technologies, Institute of Environmental Science and Research, Ltd., BC Ministry
of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Feedlot Health Management Services, Syngenta
Crop Protection, Ontario Corn Producers' Association, DuPont Canada, Inc.,
Office of Consumer Affairs, Burger King, Sobeys Ontario, McCain Produce Inc.,
Canadian Institute for Food Inspection and Regulation, Canadian Wheat Board,
National Meat Association, Seminis Vegetable Seeds, Ontario Soybean Growers,
Bunge, Ltd., UC Davis Biotechnology Program, Consumer Federation of America
Foundation, Optibrand, University of Idaho Department of Microbiology, Molecular
Biology and Biochemistry, Tactix Government Consulting, Inc., Plant Bioscience
Ltd., CanAmera Foods, Hospitality Institute of Technology and Management, Inc.,
Hartono and Company, Agri Business Group, Inc., and Global Public Affairs.
To subscribe to the html version of Agnet (subscription is free), send mail to:
listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type:
subscribe agnet-L firstname lastname
i.e. subscribe agnet-L Doug Powell
(replace agnet-L with agnettext to subscribe to the text version of agnet)
To unsubscribe to the html version of Agnet, send mail to:
listserv@listserv.uoguelph.ca
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type:
signoff agnet-L
(replace agnet-L with agnettext to unsubscribe to the text version of agnet)
For more information about the Agnet research program, please contact:
Dr. Douglas Powell
Associate Professor
dept. of plant agriculture
University of Guelph
Guelph, Ont.
N1G 2W1
tel: 519-824-4120 x54280
cell: 519-835-3015
fax: 519-763-8933
dpowell@uoguelph.ca
http://www.foodsafety.ksu.edu
The Food Safety Network's bilingual toll-free line for obtaining food safety
information: 1-866-50-FSNET (1-866-503-7638)
archived at "http://131.104.74.73:96/agnet-archives.htm