"If drug-producing corn got mixed up in the food supply, the debacle could eclipse StarLink." (item 1)

"In Iowa, StarLink corn represented 1 percent of the total crop, only 1 percent. It has tainted 50 percent of the harvest." (item 2)

1.Iowa Bills Fight GM Free Zones and Farmer Choice
2.Iowa's Starlink wake-up call: WHAT THE STARLINK FIASCO TELLS US
------

1.Iowa Bills Fight GM Free Zones and Farmer Choice
By Jeffrey M. Smith, author of Seeds of Deception
Institute for Responsible Technology Spilling the Beans, Feb, 2005

Whenever large agribusiness or their political representatives come up with a new farm strategy to save local farmers, watch out. It seems that more small farmers suffer while agribusiness prospers. The latest proposal is a bill before Iowa legislators that would prevent local jurisdictions from creating identity preservation zones.

Using identity preservation (IP), farmers keep crop varieties separate from others to meet purity requirements of their buyers. Iowa farmers, for example, may earn an extra $8.50 – $15.50 per bushel for organic soybeans. Non-GM beans bring in about $0.50 more than GM varieties, and non-GM food grade raise that to $2.00. Several specialty varieties comprise the approximately 5 percent of total US corn acreage that is IP, including an extractable starch corn grown for Japanese breweries by 60 southeast Iowa farmers.

While low commodity corn and soybean prices contributed to the 22 percent reduction of Iowa’s mid-size farms between 1997 and 2002, IP niche marketing keeps many profitable. IP crops also can bypass the "normal" big agribusiness marketing channels.

Contamination is a key challenge to IP growers. Unwanted varieties may cross-pollinate or get mixed up in the seed, harvest equipment, or during storage and transport. Some farm regions create entire zones that exclude unwanted varieties, where all the farms, and if possible all collection and distribution points, only handle approved grain.

The current bills before the Iowa house (HF 202) and senate (1144) would disallow local jurisdictions from regulating the sale or production of seeds. The reason? They are trying to prevent Iowa farmers from creating GM-free zones. These zones, which do not allow the cultivation of genetically modified crops, are being created at an accelerated rate on all continents, including the US. They provide farmers easier access to the significant world markets that avoid the controversial technology.

The introduction of GM crops in 1996 was heralded by agribusiness as the key to greater profits, but the opposite ensued. Europe cut off its $300 million corn purchases. Japan soy orders dropped by nearly 25 percent. Lowered prices for GM commodities boosted U.S. subsidies by an estimated $2-3 billion per year. Even the threat of GM wheat being introduced rallied the industry to try to make North America a GM-wheat-free-zone.

If Iowans knew before 1996 about the loss of GM markets, they could have created GM-free zones. If they knew before 1999 that A.E. Staley and ADM would not take varieties of GM corn not approved in the EU, they could have created EU-approved zones. If they realized that StarLink was not approved for human consumption, they could have created StarLink-free zones before its discovery in taco shells prompted the recall of more than 300 brands and massive economic damage to the farm sector.

It's hard to predict the future, but there are clear trends. Organic agriculture is the only sector bounding ahead at a double digit growth rate. Iowa has about 900 organic grain farmers—one of the largest contingents in the Midwest—and many others are testing the waters. GM markets continue to dry up with the consistent finding that the more people learn about the technology, the less they trust it. Now, even GM animal feed markets are shrinking overseas due to consumer demand for GM-free meat. Many EU retailers promise this to their buyers and as of February 10, 2005, three major Australian poultry producers are also refusing GM feed. An ISU economist projected that if GM wheat were introduced here, 30-50 percent of our foreign markets would go elsewhere and wheat prices would drop by a third. This could put wheat into competition with corn as a feed grain.

And we also know that Iowa hosts field trials of GM varieties unapproved for the market. The most threatening of these is the corn engineered to create pharmaceuticals. In 2002, 155 acres in Pocahontas County had to be destroyed because of "pharm" corn contamination. If drug-producing corn got mixed up in the food supply, the debacle could eclipse StarLink.

Looking at current trends, farmers may decide to create a pharm-corn free zone, an organic corridor, an approved-variety-only sector, a non-GM marketing zone, or any one of a number of zones to capitalize on any future trend, GM-related or not. Zones can give farmers greater control, greater profits, and better protection. The Iowa bills, however, would prevent all that. If they pass, biotech companies would be the winner and Iowa farms and communities would be the loser.

To view a sampling of possible future news stories with and without these laws in place, go to www.seedsofdeception.com/iowafutures.php These bills are being debated during the first week in March, 2005 (at least). For Iowans wanting to contact state representatives on this issue, visit www.seedsofdeception.com/iowa. Non-Iowans please
forward this to your Iowa friends.

Publishers and webmasters may offer this article or monthly series to your readers at no charge, by e-mailing a request to us. Individuals may read the column each month, by subscribing to a free newsletter at www.seedsofdeception.com. Also on the site, you will find these columns formatted as a two page handout.

© Copyright 2005 by Jeffrey M. Smith. Permission is granted to reproduce this in whole or in part.

Note to subscribers: As of August, 2004, this publication no longer summarizes the news on genetically engineered foods and crops. This is because there are already other free electronic newsletters that do an excellent job of this. We recommend GM Watch, www.gmwatch.org, and The Campaign, www.thecampaign.org.
------

2.Iowa's Starlink wake-up call
http://ngin.tripod.com/farming.htm

WHAT THE STARLINK FIASCO TELLS US

The Starlink fiasco started when in October 2000 traces of an Aventis GM corn [maize] called StarLink showed up in taco shells in the U.S. even though it was not approved for human consumption. It led to a massive recall of over 300 food brands. The 'StarLink' gene has also shown up unexpectedly in a second company's corn and in US corn exports. The Starlink fiasco has wide implications for the use of GM crops in farming.

BIG CONTAMINATION FACTOR

"In Iowa, StarLink corn represented 1 percent of the total crop, only 1 percent. It has tainted 50 percent of the harvest." ABC NEWS November 28, 2000

Dale Farnham, an Iowa State University agronomist: "No one knows how far the corn pollen can travel, some studies have said a quarter of a mile."

"Aventis CropScience Wednesday was at a loss to explain why another variety of corn besides its StarLink brand is producing the [StarLink] Cry9C protein." United Press International November 22, 2000, Second corn variety producing Cry9C

On the possibility of unintentional mixing of GM and non-GM post-harvest, agronomist Dale Farnham says: "There are no safeguards."

"The US Department of Agriculture claims to know where the maize — banned from all food use globally and only recently approved for US exports — is located. Aventis, the French firm which developed the genetically modified maize sold throughout the US maize belt in 1999 and 2000, says it knows, also. So do I: StarLink maize is everywhere." - US agricultural journalist Alan Guebert writing in Farmers Weekly, December 8, 2000

BIG LEMMING FACTOR... F-F-F-F-FASHION!

Donald White, a University of Illinois plant pathologist, on why US farmers have gone for GM corn: "...what happens is there is a herd mentality. Everyone has to have a biotech program." White's view chimes in with a University of Iowa study on why farmers were growing GM soya which concluded, "It is interesting to note....that increasing crop yields was cited by over half the farmers as the reason for planting GMO soybeans, yet yields were actually lower".

BIG ECONOMIC FACTOR

US corn exports to big buyers are being hurt: "...traders in Tokyo said on Wednesday the discovery that StarLink's Cry9C protein had spread to another variety of corn only deepened doubts that U.S. corn can be kept free of genetic modification."

BAD FUTURE FACTOR

Analyst Dale Gustafson of Salomon Smith Barney: "We have not yet seen GM wheat. If we did, we would be seeing the same problems in those consumer products."

US corn farmer and GM seed salesman, Nebraska, Dec 2000: "....you guys [US Government] created this monster; you clean it up. I have learned my lesson. No more GMO crops on this farm — ever." [quoted in UK 'Farmers Weekly' December 8, 2000]

All quotes unless otherwise indicated taken from: Corn leaving bad taste in world markets as GMO worries build, Reuters, Wednesday -- November 22, 2000

Go to a Print friendly Page

Email this Article to a Friend

Back to the Archive