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

[Jennifer Kalt]

I have seen it in the news since I wrote the original article, but am 
not clear on the outcome. I think the last I saw was that Monsanto was 
withdrawing its application to grow the GMO bentgrass, but I'm sure 
that's not a permanent withdrawal.

Gena Fleming wrote:
> Thanks, Jennifer. What an excellent article, and nice references too.
> I have found the press release on the Center for Food Safety site, as
> well as the court document.  I am still confused as to whether this
> generic halt on all field testing of genetically engineered crops is
> still binding.  I believe the field tials of the GM rice are just
> starting.  This is encouraging legislation, but not sure how much it
> is affecting the actual practice.
> 
> Can you add any insight here?
> 
> Thanks,
> Gena
> 
> Gena Fleming, MS, LAc
> genafleming at gmail.com
> www.plantbyplant.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."
>>
> 
>