[APWG] NEWS: Conservation Strategies Must Shift with Global Environmental Change

[Gena Fleming]

Dear Jennifer and All:

Here is the court decision calling for a halt to field trials of GM
crops (?) (dated February 2007):
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/GTBC_Doc_94_Opinion%202-5-07.pdf

This news story, dated March, 2007, announces preliminary approval of
the GM rice in Kansas:
http://www.hpj.com/archives/2007/mar07/mar12/USDAapprovesplantogrowgenet.cfm

And below, I will post an article dated May 21, 2007 about moving
forward with Ventria's GM rice planting in Kansas..  What concerns me
is that it appears the drug they are growing in the rice does not even
have final approval by the FDA as a rice, and yet it is allowed to
enter our ecosystem.

I think we need to ask the question ---- What is the structure of a
research protocol that could possibly give adequate preliminary
evaluation of the types of consequences we are going to encounter by
growing these genetically altered crops in open fields?  Nature is an
integrated, open system.  That pretty much excludes any type of
variable control, doesn't it?

Here's the May article:

Farmers Worry About Genetically Modified Rice Approval

WASHINGTON, DC, May 21, 2007 (ENS) - The National Farmers Union
expressed "great concern" over today's approval by the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's Animal Plant and Health Inspection Service, APHIS, to
allow Ventria Bioscience to plant rice that is genetically modified to
produce pharmaceuticals in Kansas.

The decision "poses a potential risk to the American food supply,"
said the National Farmers Union, NFU, which represents 250,000 farm
and ranch families in all U.S. states.

"America's farmers have suffered the economic consequences of two
major instances when unapproved genetically modified rice entered the
food supply in the past year," said NFU President Tom Buis.

Ventria Bioscience, a biotech company based in Sacramento, California,
is developing a product made from genetically engineered rice that
helped reduce the duration of diarrhea in children by 30 percent, as
part of an oral rehydration solution. Childhood diarrhea is the second
leading killer of children, according to the World Health
Organization.

Last September, Kansas and Ventria officials agreed to establish a
bioprocessing facility for plant-made pharmaceuticals in Junction
City.

Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius said, "I welcome Ventria Bioscience
to Kansas and look forward to their contributions to the health of
children worldwide."

The facility will process Ventria's biotech rice. Proteins extracted
from the rice will be incorporated into oral rehydration solutions to
address childhood diarrhea. Ventria is also developing other products
using these proteins. The rice itself is discarded.

Farmers are expected to be among the project's major beneficiaries, as
those who grow the rice that supplies the facility can earn a premium
compared to their next most lucrative crop, said Kansas Agriculture
Secretary Adrian Polansky.

"This is as an important development for Kansas farmers, who stand to
benefit from the additional income," Polansky said. "They also have
the satisfaction of knowing they are helping provide affordable
healthcare products to children who desperately need it."

Buis said National Farmers Union is concerned that the Ventria
Bioscience's proposal does not specifically address the necessary
safety precautions for transit of the rice.

He said that a significant risk may exist to all crops and soils
neighboring the transportantion route.

Buis said that despite Kansas' recent devastating tornadoes and
disastrous flooding, part of APHIS' response to official comments was
that "extreme weather events are unlikely to occur in the area of the
field trial."

"Until USDA and FDA improve oversight and regulation of pharma crops,
NFU will remain extremely concerned about pharma commodity production
based on economic, environmental, food safety and liability risks to
both producers and consumers," Buis said.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved the rice-grown
drugs due to potentially hazardous side effects. "This lack of
approval means Ventria Bioscience does not have a sufficient market,"
said Buis, "thus the production of this crop appears to provide no
benefit to Kansas farmers or the economy."

 Gena Fleming
genafleming at gmail.com


On 02/02/2008, Jennifer Kalt <jkalt at asis.com> wrote:
> Below is a summary of another example of contamination of other plants
> by genetically modified plants. The genetically engineered bentgrass
> (Agrostis stolonifera) escaped trial fields, and its genes have been
> documented in native bentgrass in the Crooked River National Grassland
> near Bend, Oregon, 3.8 km from the trial field.
>
> I wrote this overview for our chapter's newsletter in February 2007.
>
> Jennifer Kalt
> Conservation Chair
> North Coast Chapter
> California Native Plant Society
> P.O. Box 1067
> Arcata, CA  95518
> http://northcoastcnps.org/
>
> The California Native Plant Society's mission is to preserve and protect
> native plants in their natural habitats.
>
> ************************************************************************
> Field Tests of Genetically-Engineered Turfgrass Blocked Due to
> Inadequate Environmental Review
>
> The vast majority of corn and soybeans grown in the U.S. are now
> genetically-engineered ("GE"). These field-grown GE crops have been
> found to pose threats to  native plants (through hybridization and
> changes to vegetation) and native pollinators (which may be impacted by
> foraging on GE pollen). A recent study found that 22 of the 25 most
> important crop species are known to hybridize with wild relatives (Wolfe
> and Blair 2007). For these reasons, much of the attention on
> environmental impacts of GE plants has focused on agricultural crops,
> but a proposed use of GE turfgrasses for golf courses and landscaping
> has been found to threaten native grasses.
>
> A federal judge ruled in February that the U.S. Department of
> Agriculture (USDA) must halt approval of all new field trials of
> genetically-engineered organisms until more rigorous environmental
> reviews are conducted. USDA's Animal Plant Health and Inspection Service
> (APHIS) allowed Scotts Miracle Gro, Inc. to conduct a series of open-air
> field tests without any review of potential environmental affects. Tests
> of "Roundup-ready" turfgrass were conducted on over 2,000 acres at sites
> across the U.S, beginning in 2002.
>
> Environmental contamination from the GE creeping bentgrass (Agrostis
> stolonifera) was discovered in the Crooked River National Grassland near
> Bend, Oregon. EPA researchers found multiple instances in which pollen
> from GE-bentgrass traveled several miles and transferred its traits to
> three native bentgrass species via hybridization. Genetic contamination
> of native species was found up to 3.8 kilometers from a 421-acre test
> plot managed by the Oregon Department of Agriculture.
>
> A lawsuit was filed in 2003 by several non-profit groups, including the
> Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center based in Ashland, Oregon. Plaintiffs
> argued that hybridization of Roundup-ready non-native bentgrass with
> native bentgrass could alter native vegetation, leading to diminished
> aesthetic and recreational value of natural areas.  Defendants argue
> that even if GE-bentgrass became established in areas of concern,
> plaintiffs would suffer no aesthetic harm, because unless they
> encountered a bentgrass plant and sprayed it with Roundup, they would
> not be able to tell the difference between a genetically-engineered
> plant and a native plant. Researchers concluded that selective pressure
> from direct application or drift of glyphosate herbicide could enhance
> movement of genes into native grass populations, and that obligatory
> outcrossing and vegetative spread could further contribute to
> persistence of transgenes in wild Agrostis populations, both in the
> presence or absence of herbicide selection (Reichman et al. 2006).
>
> APHIS is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in response
> to Scotts'
> Petition for Deregulation of Genetically Engineered Glyphosate-Tolerant
> Creeping Bentgrass. This non-native grass is naturalized in every county
> in California, and open field trials of GE bentgrass has the potential
> to hybridize with both non-native and native bentgrass species. Several
> rare bentgrass species occur in California, and open field trials pose a
> threat to these rare species in particular. The Dorothy King Young
> Chapter submitted comments regarding concerns that GE-bentgrass could
> impact the rare Agrostis blasdalei along the Mendocino coast. CNPS will
> continue to monitor agency actions related to GE plants that could
> impact native plants and vegetation.
>
> For more information:
>
> Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, P.O. Box 102, Ashland, OR.
> www.ks.wild.org
>
> International Center for Technology Assessment, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
> Mike Johanns, Secretary, U. S. Department of Agriculture, et al.,
> Defendants, and the Scotts Company, Defendant-Intervenor. Civil Action
> 03-00020 (HHK)
>  http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/GTBC_Doc_94_Opinion%202-5-07.pdf
>
> Reichman, J. R. et al. 2006. Establishment of transgenic
> herbicide-resistant creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L.) in
> nonagronomic habitats. Molecular Ecology 15: 4243.
>
> Wolfe, L. N. and A. C. Blair. 2007. Born to run: competition enhances
> the spread of genes from crops to wild relatives. New Phytologist 173:3,
> 450–452.
>
>
> Gena Fleming wrote:
> > Hi Jil:
> >
> > Thank you for your email.  You ask the following question:
> >
> > "Would you please provide me some examples of the genetic modification you
> > refer to? I would like to learn more about it and compile examples of well
> > documented incidences of this."
>
>


-- 
Gena Fleming, MS, LAc
www.plantbyplant.com