|
|
 
|
Biotech wheat issue starts to heat up (Monday, April 21, 2003 -- CropChoice news) -- Topeka Capitol-Journal (Kansas), 04/17/03: Earlier this year, a representative of Monsanto told me during a radio
interview that the company had no intention of releasing its Roundup Ready
wheat variety anytime soon --- or at least until consumers, growers and
wheat buyers had no serious objections to the commercial release of biotech
wheat. Monsanto delivered that same message to those attending the Wheat
Industry Conference in January in Albuquerque.
One would think those comments might put to rest criticism that Monsanto is
being insensitive to industry concerns about the issue or grower suspicions
that the firm would adhere to a specific timetable in releasing Roundup
Ready wheat, regardless of public and industry opinion.
In fact, quite the contrary appears to be happening. If anything, some
growers and groups are even more vocal in questioning Monsanto's intentions
than they were one or two years ago --- perhaps a sign that the company
waited too long to clarify its position on the biotech wheat issue.
I suspect Monsanto may have fueled some of the criticism itself when the
firm petitioned the USDA's Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service back in
December for approval of its Roundup Ready wheat variety. There is
speculation that approval could be granted in time for commercialism of the
variety ahead of the 2004 planting season. That doesn't necessarily mean
Monsanto is planning to release the variety at that time.
Much of the criticism is coming from the Northern Plains, a major producer
of hard red spring wheat. The first genetically engineered wheat variety
slated for commercial release is spring wheat.
In Montana, the state Legislature approved a non-binding resolution urging
a delay in the introduction of genetically modified wheat until it has
better acceptance. The action came as University of Iowa economist reported
that Montana hard red spring wheat could lose one-third of its value if
biotech seed were introduced in the next two to six years. Robert Wisner
estimates the United States could lose up to half its foreign wheat markets
if it adopts the genetic technology. Wisner says the major stumbling block
is consumer acceptance of biotech wheat, not food safety.
A recent poll of North Dakota grain elevator operators indicated a
substantial level of concern over the potential commercialization of
biotech wheat. The survey, conducted by the Minneapolis-based watchdog
group known as the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, targeted
North Dakota because the state is the top producer of hard red spring wheat.
The group sent the survey to 317 North Dakota grain elevators; 52 of them
responded (roughly one out of every six who received the survey). Of the
respondents, 98 percent said they were either very concerned (82 percent)
or somewhat concerned (16 percent) about the proposed introduction of
genetically engineered Roundup Ready wheat. In addition, 78 percent said
they supported an expanded public review of biotech wheat compared with the
U.S. government process previously used to approve genetically modified crops.
The elevators ranked loss of export markets as their greatest concern
related to the commercialization of biotech wheat. Second on the list of
worries was the feasibility of creating a workable segregation system.
Farther north, the chairman of the Canadian Wheat Board has called on the
federal government there to close the regulatory gap on genetically
modified wheat by adding a cost-benefit analysis to the Canadian
government's approval process. Appearing before a House of Commons
committee earlier this month, Ken Ritter was quoted as saying, "The urgency
of this issue cannot be overstated."
Ritter believes the introduction of Roundup ready wheat would have a
devastating impact on western Canadian farmers --- claiming that more than
80 percent of the markets that the Canadian Wheat Board sells into aren't
open to GM wheat.
Ritter is suggesting that any cost-benefit analysis on genetically modified
wheat should look not only at the impact of lost markets but also at the
added costs of segregating GM wheat in the market system, and the costs of
controlling volunteer GM wheat.
While the discussion of possible changes in the regulatory approval process
for genetically modified wheat would certainly include greater public
input, it also could have a huge impact on the approval process for all
biotech varieties in the future. Is that what U.S. agriculture really wants?
How many of the biotech varieties currently being grown in the United
States would have received approval if such a public review process had
been in effect five or 10 years ago? How many agricultural research firms
would be willing to invest the vast amounts of money needed to develop
biotech varieties if the approval of those varieties hinged on the whims of
public opinion in addition to meeting the requirements of a sound
scientific review?
For the moment, I don't fault Monsanto for seeking regulatory approval of
Roundup Ready wheat. From a strictly business perspective, it probably
makes sense for them to do so.
However, the firm also has given its word that it will exercise restraint
in releasing the biotech wheat variety until there is broad public
acceptance. For Monsanto to do anything less now would be a public
relations nightmare for the company --- and clearly would violate the
pledge it has made to wheat growers.
Kelly Lenz is farm director for AM 580 WIBW Radio and the Kansas
Agriculture Network. | |
