It was pretty evident at last week’s World Food Prize symposium in Des Moines that European nations remain the most resistant to biotech crops. But some farmers are bucking the system.
Oliver Ransmann of Germany participated in a Truth about Trade and Technology farmer roundtable that included over 20 producers from nearly as many countries discussing the benefits and challenges of biotechnology in their parts of the world. I had a very interesting conversation with him about the lack of acceptance of biotech in his country and Europe in general. He just started using Monsanto’s corn borer resistant genetics two years ago on his 400 ha farm that grows mainly corn and rye to generate biogas. He talked about the stringent government regulations on biotech crops and the general distrust of biotech by both farmers and the general public.
He told me that farmers who choose to grow biotech crops in Germany are “branded” in a way and subject to vandalism. “This year my ground was damaged by activists – we had iron sticks in the fields and spoons and knives in the grain,” he told me. “We can’t understand why people are doing it and it’s very dangerous.”
So why does he still choose to grow biotech crops on his farm? “If I’m not using Bt maize, I have 30-40 percent less productivity and I can’t afford it,” he said. He understands that biotech varieties offer environmental benefits by allowing farmers to use less chemicals and to produce more on less land, but he says that message is being ignored in Europe.
Several speakers at the World Food Prize symposium this week in Des Moines were from the major agricultural chemical companies, including Monsanto, Syngenta and Pioneer.
Pioneer Hi-Bred International president Paul Schickler was on a panel that focused on the “Promises and Challenges of Next-Generation Science and Technology.” He took the first question to the panel, which was “How optimistic are you that the world can reduce hunger by half by 2015?”
Schickler stated that he was very confident that goal could be reached, simply on the basis of increased food production, using hybrid corn as an example. “If you look back throughout the development of hybrid corn, productivity has improved at about one and a half percent per year,” he said. “As we look to the future, we think we can double that, and that has already started to show up in the last 8-10 years through the use of biotechnology, plant genetics and improved agronomic practices.” That would mean corn yields in the United States could hit 210 bushels an acre in ten years, and what that means is increased sustainability because more food can be produced on less acreage.
Boosting yield — the amount of corn grown per acre — is crucial not just for increasing corn production to meet all needs, but to do it in a sustainable way that uses natural resources more efficiently. And developing new seed technology is one of the most effective ways of boosting yield.
But this can be a slow and daunting process. And that’s why new technology from DuPont may be important. DuPont’s Pioneer Hi-Bred International division is using laser technology to help speed up research. The competitive landscape of seed technology has gone far to help feed and fuel the world and should be welcomed by all who are concerned about energy security and world hunger.
Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer will present a three pronged strategy to deal with rising food prices, climate change and energy security when he travels to Rome next week for the conference on World Food Security being held by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations.
Schafer says the strategy is basically to “provide food and other support to people who are hungry now, direct development assistance to those countries best able to rapidly increase the production of key food staples that can help feed the hungry, and encourage action to address multilateral and country-specific policies that prevent access to food and the technologies that produce food.”
To try and encourage greater use of biotechnology, Schafer and Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance Henrietta Fore will host a side event focused on new technologies to showcase developing countries that have moved forward with public investment in adoption of bioengineered products. “Bioengineered crops are one of many situations that need to take place for increasing yields around the country if we’re going to meet the demands of increased consumption,” Schafer says.
Biofuels will most definitely be on the plate at the World Food conference and Schafer is prepared to defend US ethanol production policy. “I would point out that in the United States and in other countries as well, all ethanol production specifically has come from increased yields in the corn crops,” Schafer said. “Our export markets are up in corn out of the United States. The yield increases are taking care of it, and certainly the benefits derived are much more than the 2 to 3 percent that is contributing to the rising inflation in food costs internationally. We think it’s an important initiative, and while people do have some concern I think we can point out the facts here, not the emotions but the facts, that this is not distorting the global price of food. And it’s an important direction we need to go.”
It’s great to see the Wall Street Journal run an article that puts the future of corn and ethanol in a good light. Sure, a few typical and unnecessary jabs were taken, but this column, based on an interview with a Syngenta exec, covers the bases well. The future of ag is bright, especially when you consider the global economy and the impact of technology.
The key snippet here is the final sentence: “Bottom line: It’s a good time to be an ag-science company, and even a better time to be a farmer.”
While the French were busy banning the production of biotech corn last week, their neighbors to the south were importing more US corn than they have in almost a decade.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign and Agricultural Service reports that the United States sold 2.5 million bushels of corn for shipment to Spain the week ending January 11 – the first of this magnitude to Spain since 1998-99, according to U.S. Grains Council officials who say biotechnology has been the primary trade barrier causing Spain not to seek U.S. corn.
“Because the tight supply of feed grains has feed millers and producers in a severe price squeeze, the timing is right to try and educate the European Union’s grain industry about biotechnology and elicit their support in addressing policy,” said Dale Artho, U.S. Grains Council chairman. “They were especially receptive to the idea of relaxing the EU GMO (genetically modified organisms) policies for U.S. corn. We discussed how corn with plant technology attributes could be utilized in their milling process for feed export markets and how that would reduce the pressure on their domestic markets.”
Artho said Spain’s purchase of U.S. corn is a good sign that the Council’s education efforts are working and gives U.S. producers reason to be optimistic about the potential to export genetically enhanced feed grains to Europe.
When European activist wackos act like spoiled children, they get their way.
That’s basically what happened when French President Nicolas Sarkozy made a “political” decision this week to ban the only genetically modified crop grown in France, Monsanto 810 – better known here as YieldGard Corn Borer. The variety produces a naturally occurring toxin, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), that kills corn borers.
“It does not mean that France does not participate in GMO research,” Sarkozy said. “It simply means that with the principle of precaution at stake, I am making a major political decision to carry our country to the forefront of the debate on the environment.”
Credit for the decision can be given, at least in part, to a high-profile activist who went on a hunger strike January 3 to demand a year-long ban on GMO crops. Anti-globalization activist and farmer Jose Bove has been on a rampage against GMOs, and even “been convicted of ripping up GM crops in southern France.” Sounds like a spoiled kid to me.
The decision was welcomed by Greenpeace activists, more spoiled children who in March dumped a ton of GMO corn at the door of Sarkozy’s campaign headquarters in Paris. (Question: Where did they get it? Did they grow it themselves, buy it – or rip it up out of someone’s field?)
During the campaign last year, Sarkozy’s opponents both said they would back a moratorium on GMO corn, while Sarkozy said he was “skeptical about the real benefits of GMOs” but that open-field crop trials should continue for research purposes, to keep open the option of using GM crops “once all safety conditions have been met.”
This week, after a controversial report that indicated a few scientists thought MON810 might have a negative impact on wildlife, Sarkozy enacted the ban by invoking “a safeguard clause” which allows a member state of the EU to refuse the sale of a product permitted across the 27-nation bloc.
Green Party French farmers like Bove (pictured on the right in the media spotlight) are pleased and eating again, but the head of the country’s largest farmers union called the announcement “surprising and shocking. The decision was very political to please a number of people including some on a hunger strike.”
Last year, Monsanto’s 810 corn made up less than one percent of all the corn grown in France. The president of AGPM, a French association of corn growers, said that France can survive without GMOs, “but it means we will protect our crops solely by chemical means and take the risk of depending on more imports in the future.”
Meanwhile, Monsanto will consider all of its options, including legal remedies. Monsanto spokesman Jonathan Ramsay said, “Monsanto will defend our customers’ right to choose.” So, it’s not over yet, but it still sends a message to wackos that hunger strikes, tearing up crops and dumping corn on the street gets them their way.
Consumers have a growing amount of online information that provides them with good science based information to make better choices, especially when it comes to new energy choices. We’re going to point to them whenever and wherever we find them.
Take for example a YouTube video from Monsanto that helps provide some positive perspective for food and fuel. It’s titled, “Renewable Fuels: From Farm To Fuel Pump.” This 6 minute video reviews how “Ethanol and Biodiesel can offer benefits to consumers and farmers.” The video features comments from NCGA’s CEO Rick Tolman who talks about increasing yields and the productivity of America’s corn growers.
This photo from the image library of the U.S. Department of Agriculture shows crops or products that have either already been genetically engineered or are involved in ongoing or planned transgenic studies.
Biotechnology and genetic engineering are often a source of controversy because of fears that modifying crops genetically could impact human health or biodiversity or something. But a recent study indicates that genetically modified crops might actually help contribute to increased productivity in sustainable agriculture.
The study published in the June 8 issue of the journal Science, analyzes for the first time environmental impact data from field experiments all over the world, involving corn and cotton plants with a Bt gene inserted for its insecticidal properties.
In an analysis of 42 field experiments, scientists found that this particular modification, which causes the plant to produce an insecticide internally, can have an environmental benefit because large-scale insecticide spraying can be avoided. Organisms such as ladybird beetles, earthworms, and bees in locales with “Bt crops” fared better in field trials than those within locales treated with chemical insecticides.
What is kind of ironic about the whole genetic engineering/biotech controversy is that the same people who have problems with genetically modified crops often have no problem with the concept of manufacturing embryos to use their stem cells for research to find “cures” for diseases or conditions – which is essentially genetic engineering on a human level. California is a good example of that kind of thinking, where they want to ban farmers from planting GM strawberries, while at the same time provide taxpayer dollars for embryonic stem cell research.
Oliver Ransmann of Germany participated in a Truth about Trade and Technology farmer roundtable that included over 20 producers from nearly as many countries discussing the benefits and challenges of biotechnology in their parts of the world. I had a very interesting conversation with him about the lack of acceptance of biotech in his country and Europe in general. He just started using Monsanto’s corn borer resistant genetics two years ago on his 400 ha farm that grows mainly corn and rye to generate biogas. He talked about the stringent government regulations on biotech crops and the general distrust of biotech by both farmers and the general public.
Pioneer Hi-Bred International president Paul Schickler was on a panel that focused on the “Promises and Challenges of Next-Generation Science and Technology.” He took the first question to the panel, which was “How optimistic are you that the world can reduce hunger by half by 2015?”
To try and encourage greater use of biotechnology, Schafer and Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance Henrietta Fore will host a side event focused on new technologies to showcase developing countries that have moved forward with public investment in adoption of bioengineered products. “Bioengineered crops are one of many situations that need to take place for increasing yields around the country if we’re going to meet the demands of increased consumption,” Schafer says.
While the French were busy banning the production of biotech corn last week, their neighbors to the south were importing more US corn than they have in almost a decade.
When European activist wackos act like spoiled children, they get their way.
“It does not mean that France does not participate in GMO research,” Sarkozy said. “It simply means that with the principle of precaution at stake, I am making a major political decision to carry our country to the forefront of the debate on the environment.”
The decision was welcomed by Greenpeace activists, more spoiled children
Green Party French farmers like Bove (pictured on the right in the media spotlight) are pleased and eating again, but the head of the country’s largest farmers union called the announcement “surprising and shocking. The decision was very political to please a number of people including some on a hunger strike.”
This photo from the image library of the U.S. Department of Agriculture shows crops or products that have either already been genetically engineered or are involved in ongoing or planned transgenic studies.