iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Monsanto Wins Supreme Court Case: Genetically Modified Alfalfa Ban Lifted

Genetically Modified Alfalfa

First Posted: 06/21/10 02:21 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 05:50 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AP)-- The Supreme Court on Monday lifted a nationwide ban on the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa seeds, despite claims they might harm the environment.

In a 7-1 vote Monday, the court reversed a federal appeals court ruling that had prohibited Monsanto Co. from selling alfalfa seeds because they are resistant to the popular weed killer Roundup.

The U.S. Agriculture Department must now decide whether to allow the genetically-modified seeds to be planted. It had earlier approved the seeds, but courts in California and Oregon said the USDA did not look hard enough at whether the seeds would eventually share their genes with other crops.

"This Supreme Court ruling is important for every American farmer, not just alfalfa growers," said David F. Snively, Monsanto's senior vice president and general counsel. "All growers can rely on the expertise of USDA, and trust that future challenges to biotech approvals must now be based on scientific facts, not speculation."

A federal judge in San Francisco had barred the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa nationwide until the government could adequately study the crop's potential impact on organic and conventional varieties.

St. Louis-based Monsanto argued that the ban was too broad and was based on the assumption that their products were harmful. Opponents of the use of genetically engineered seeds say they can contaminate conventional crops, but Monsanto says such cross-pollination is unlikely.

"We agree that the District Court's injunction against planting went too far," said Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the majority opinion.

Justice John Paul Stevens was the only justice to dissent. "It was reasonable for the court to conclude that planting could not go forward until more complete study ... showed that the known problem of gene flow could in reality be prevented," he said.

Alfalfa, which is used for livestock feed and can be planted in spring or fall, is a major crop grown on about 22 million acres in the U.S., Monsanto said in court papers. Monsanto's alfalfa is made from genetic material from bacteria that makes the crop resistant to Roundup.

Justice Stephen Breyer took no part in the case because his brother, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco, issued the initial ruling against Monsanto.

The case is Monsanto v. Geerston Seed Farms, 09-475.

Read the court's decision:


Monsanto v. Geertson Seed Farms: Supreme Court Opinion

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON (AP)-- The Supreme Court on Monday lifted a nationwide ban on the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa seeds, despite claims they might harm the environment. In a 7-1 vote Monday, ...
WASHINGTON (AP)-- The Supreme Court on Monday lifted a nationwide ban on the planting of genetically engineered alfalfa seeds, despite claims they might harm the environment. In a 7-1 vote Monday, ...
Filed by T.J. Ortenzi  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,172
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (30 total)
10:19 PM on 08/14/2010
For more information on Monsanto’s corruption see the following articles:

1. Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food -- http://www.infowars.com/senate-bill-s510-makes-it-illegal-to-grow-share-trade-or-sell-homegrown-food/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010,may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US. “If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice.”

Monsanto’s Michael Taylor, who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed the bill and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress) to administer the agency it would create — without judicial review — IF IT PASSES. S 510 WOULD GIVE MONSANTO UNLIMITED POWER OVER ALL US SEED, FOOD SUPPLEMENTS, FOOD AND FARMING.”

2. Lose your property for growing food? Big Brother legislation could mean prosecution, fines up to $1 million -- http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92002
“House Resolution 875, or the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, was introduced by Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. DeLauro's husband, Stanley Greenburg, conducts research for Monsanto – the world's leading producer of herbicides and genetically engineered seed.” Monsanto’s involved again.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
floodberg
Attorney (ret.)
10:01 AM on 08/17/2010
Another Fav - I wish I could fan you again, RightsGuy!
04:58 AM on 07/12/2010
Is it just me or is the Supreme Court making lots of decisions lately about public safety? Don't remember anything in the constitution giving them the right to legislate public safety from the bench. Before, they wouldn't even consider hearing a case like this - suddenly, any case that involves giant corporations being stopped are heard by the Supreme Court? hmmm, no Roberts said he didn't believe in the judicial legislating from the bench - and he wouldn't lie would he?
photo
drjasonmd
Shalom, compa!
12:37 PM on 08/15/2010
Define "legislating from the bench."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sprootles
Taking on Baggies one at a time...
02:07 PM on 06/30/2010
"Orxy & Crake" anyone? Seriously. Next thing you know we'll be eating chicken nobbies and taking Blyss Plus tablets....

*sigh*
09:42 AM on 06/27/2010
As an owner of pet rabbits, this is upsetting. When do they start planting it because I want to buy up some regular alfalfa for the older and sick and baby bunnies.
does this stuff haf built in insecticides like the corn (which I try to avoid)?
And of course doesn't need to be labelled?

gag
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
floodberg
Attorney (ret.)
10:01 AM on 08/17/2010
Clem2, I sympathize - I feel the same way about my pets and livestock, and I hope a local farmer helps you out.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
03:07 PM on 06/25/2010
Good grief. I am usually liberal on issues but the side liberals have taken on GMO and modern farming methods is embarassing. It's as if the left wants us all to return to 1950's agriculture with it's oil intensive practices, backbreaking labor and high erosion of topsoil. They want the pretty little red barns with cattle and hogs crapping wherever they like free range style with animal waste running directly into streams. it's better to control it with modern waste management than let it run everywhere. We don't allow for human waste to run everywhere, right. Is that so hard to understand?

GMOs allow for less fuel used, less ersosion and less labor. I have been struggling on why my fellow liberals just don't get it. I now realize they don't get it since they are so removed form day to day agruculture. I grew up on farm as did many liberals who agree with GMO use. The closest thing many urban liberals get to agriculture is driving to the farmer's market. We need ag education for urban liberals. now
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
floodberg
Attorney (ret.)
02:54 PM on 08/17/2010
HazelPethigFan, you never answered my question from 2 days ago: are you employed by or working for one of these companies? Your profile comments sure look like it, and I'd like an answer.

I still own a homestead (wheat, NoDak, 1904) and we've always composted, plowed under soybeans, fallowed, anything to increase topsoil and retention (Norwegian, we remember the dustbowl) and use almost no little pesticide, fertilizer, and our superior unpatented seed which the foreign growers love.

We've rejected GE seed despite NAWG rolling over. It would skyrocket costs, put us in the sole control of 5 seed companies (backed by Wall Street; remember, we're the only state in the union that didn't fall for them and still have a strong economy), and deny us the price competition of foreign markets. An 'accidental contamination' years ago taught us lessons; and NAWG has persisted in advocating GE wheat, warned us that after 100 years of producing the best wheat from our own seeds, we could be sued if we don't buy theirs. (Money talks.)

Our wheat tastes better, is cheaper and has big foreign demand. Maybe GE is safe (corn disaster, remember?). We're logical and practical. When and if foreign markets universally accept it, we'll think about it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim Shaffer
50 yo US citizen, 25 year resident in Bilbao Spain
02:56 PM on 06/23/2010
Let's say we didn't forget what Monsanto's public health record is, and the way they defended the use of PCB's, when they were well aware of their toxicity. This company will stop at nothing to make a profit. Their GM corn seed here in Spain has shown the capability of destroying non GM corn crops with GM corn pollen, and at the same time is useless for seed causing a defacto Monsanto dependence. Now if this GM alfalfa is 'Roundup' resistant that's more than enough reason not to use it. Alfalfa is a weed anywhere but in an alfalfa field, guess who you're gonna have to buy your weed killer from? - I pray that's the worst consequence-

It's becoming abundantly clear that our supreme court justices are just as owned as our politicians. That's scary, because it leaves no peaceful alternative for the nation to take it's government back.
09:03 PM on 06/23/2010
Jim Shaffer

I empathize. But you exaggerate.

I knew Justice Ginsberg. No one and no corporation owns her.

Justice Stevens dissented. He would not were he owned by Monsanto.

The Chief Justice and Justices Scalia, Alito, and Kennedy are not corrupt; they have pro-big-business perspectives because of how they were raised and the environments of their upbringing.

Justice Breyer did not vote. His brother authored the District Court decision that blacked Monsanto.

Justice Sotomayor's background and her legal career history suggest that she is not biased in favor of Monsanto or any other major, rapacious corporation.

The Supreme Court's decision does not support GE alfalfa. It holds merely that Monsanto can market its alfalfa seeds pending the USDA's final determination whether to ban them or to permit them subject to limits or without restriction.

Justice Thomas is the only Justice who was a Monsanto man. He IS biased. But the big trouble is elsewhere. Obama, the USDA, and the FDA are captured and corrupted by Monsanto. See my TWO posts of 5:05 AM, Tuesday, 22 June.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jim Shaffer
50 yo US citizen, 25 year resident in Bilbao Spain
09:59 PM on 06/23/2010
You're obviouosly keeping close tabs on them, but the point isn't how these decisions come to be - that's always arguable - but the rulings themselves follow a very obvious pattern.
So if USDA hasn't decided yet they can market their seed?
It doesn't really matter though, while politicians come and go, big corporate influence peddling is here to stay. Monsanto's been playing this game for a hundred years. Every time they won, the nation lost.
01:26 PM on 06/23/2010
Monsanto is an evil empire who is destroying the world we live in. The government is not going to do anything to stop them. People need to stop buying food products with either soy beans or corn and to support your local organic farmers.
10:36 AM on 06/23/2010
Don't forget that Monsanto was just identified as the most unethical corporation in the entire world by an independent european research group - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/28/the-least-ethical-compani_n_440073.html?slidenumber=0ZHHXzV%2FaPE%3D&&&&&&&&&&&&slideshow#slide_image.

The film Food, Inc. does a good job of identifying Monsanto's activities and the negative impact on crop diversity. Clarence Thomas, who worked for them while he was in private practice, wrote the decision that upheld their ability to patent seeds and enforce these patents. In doing so they changed the way farmers farm, and drastically reduced biodiversity, while also putting many people in the agricultural industry out of business (the entire industry of seed cleaning has been pretty much wiped out thanks in no small part to Monsanto lawsuits).

Monsanto spends tons of money in lobbying and litigation to ensure that they can continue to make tons of money. Their patenting is about control of marketshare, and not about what is best for the consumer. My guess is that, even where non-gmo foods are proven safer or more effective in terms of yield, they will still push for the use of a gmo product, simply because they can patent and control that product, and sell more seed. As has been pointed out, these foods are already banned in europe. We need to push back against both the government, and these corporations, and demand the same consumer protections that europe already has in place.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
09:45 AM on 06/24/2010
Stop spreading fear and paranoia. You are as bad as the right wingers.
GMO crops reduce erosion, reduce fuel used, reduce labor input.
It turns out the old fashioned 1950's style agriculture you promote does more harm to the environment than modern methods. It's just today's methods aren't as pretty since farmers don't need quaint little farmsteads with pretty little red barns where animal waste is allowed to run anywhere it wants, free range style. It's not the 1950's anymore my friend.


Humans have been messing with the genes of plants and animals for thousands of years. It's just now we are getting very good at it. Norman Borlaug won the Nobel Peace prize for engineering wheat that saved an estimated 1 billion people from starvation. He was a big supporter of GMO. You need to read what he said about GMO. I trust someone who saved 1 billion before I trust the obvious anti-science propaganda from the far left
12:50 AM on 06/25/2010
"GMO crops reduce erosion, reduce fuel used, reduce labor input" . .

and cause organ failure: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/12/monsantos-gmo-corn-linked_n_420365.html.

It is not "spreading fear and paranoia" to point out the truth about the negative consequences, and the vast number of present unknowns, that GMO crops present. You do not really sound like you have even a modest understanding of the present science behind genetic modification, or the (catastrophic) impact that modern industrial agriculture has had on seed biodiversity. It is wrong to say that humans have been messing with the genes of plants and animals for thousands of years, if you are attempting to equate past practices to modern genetic manipulation. Do you really think cross-breeding two plants of the same variety is the same as inserting genes from a different species into a plant? Here are just a few of the very real problems associated with these practices:

1. We have no idea the impact that this modification will have on natural selection or further evolutionary development;

2. We have done insufficient testing on the safety of these gmo foods;

3. The extraordinary reduction in the biodiversity of food seeds through the use of just a few GMO varieties could (and most likely will at some point) prove catastrophic, if they are susceptible to a particular, presently unforeseen illness (look for a dutch elm in the u.s. and see how many you find).
01:02 AM on 06/25/2010
It is also not "anti-science" to demand that research and genetic modification be conducted in an ethical manner, which includes treading very carefully when you start manipulating the food supply for the entire world. How excited are you going to be when one corporation controls access to an entire food crop, such as monsanto with soybeans in the u.s.? Good science involves testing and consideration of the consequences of the experiment. Where a food supply is involved, it should also involve significant long term testing of the ramifications of the use of crop on both the environment and people before being approved for mass use and consumption. Europe is way, way ahead of us in this regard. Are you accusing them of being fear mongers and "anti-science"?

By the way, I have a doctoral degree, and my wife is a PHD geneticist with a degree in molecular biology, who has done literally years of laboratory research in genetic modification (for universities with the public good in mind, not corporate profit) so no, this is not the spreading of fear and paranoia from the anti-science far left.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
07:39 AM on 06/23/2010
The World According to Monsanto is an excellent documentary showing their criminal practices.
Judicial corruption is a real problem in America.
The EU has a moratorium on GMO products to protect its agricultural industry.
Japan has banned GMO products.
Both require certification of all products from the US, that they be GMO free, which is now practically impossible.
Dr. Arpad Pusztai, a British researcher, was fired for claiming health dangers from GMO foods.
The FDA, with Monsanto lobbyists on its payroll, disagrees.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
04:52 AM on 06/23/2010
In Minnesota, we have been fighting the introduction of Eurasian Milfoil and Asian carp.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/invasives/laws.html

Eurasian milfoil is an invasive aquatic plant that displaces the native plants and disrupts the ecology.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/invasives/laws.html

Asian carp is an invasive type of fish that attacks the aquatic food chain.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1962108,00.html
http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/invasive/asiancarp/
http://minnesotaindependent.com/58038/supreme-court-rejects-asian-carp-case

If Monsanto has created a seed that is hard to get rid of and may be genetically invasive, then the burden of proof must be on Monsanto to prove no risk. The potential for great harm is too great for passive concern.

And it is not just crops. In England, they have combined human and animal DNA.
"Using the tools of synthetic biology, scientists from the J. Craig Venter Institute installed a completely artificial genome inside a host cell without DNA. The new genome invigorated the host cell, which began to grow and reproduce" - a man-made bacterium.
http://news.discovery.com/tech/synthetic-genome-life.html
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-21/life-form-created-with-man-made-dna-offers-benefits-dangers.html

Researchers are playing God, and it is time for the state of bioethics to be re-examined.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
09:05 AM on 06/24/2010
Playing God? Oh come on...Stop spreading fear and paranoia. You are as bad as the right wingers. Humans have been messing with the genes of plants and animals for thousands of years. It's just now we are getting very good at it. Norman Borlaug was trained in your state. He won that Nobel Peace rpize for engineering wheat that saved an estimated 1 billion people from starvation. He was a big supporter of GMO. You need to read what he said about GMO. I trust someone who saved 1 billion before I trust the obvious anti-science propaganda from the far left.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
03:33 AM on 06/25/2010
Selective breeding is a slow, deliberative process that is easily controlled. Manufacturing an entire genome that does not exist in nature, then giving it life, is something else entirely. Creating new life IS playing God - in the truest sense.

I am hardly anti-science. I am, after all, an engineer. Science is my toy store. That does not stop me from recognizing the limitations. The ability to do something is, by itself, insufficient justification for actually doing it.

We are at a point in our industrialization where science and technology are advancing faster than our understanding of the full consequences. Moral and ethical consideration are also lagging.

I do not dispute the good that GMO has done, only that it must be explored for unintended and unexpected consequences.

DDT was considered an excellent pesticide for many years until it was discovered to be toxic to a wide variety of animals and moderately toxic to humans. It was ultimately banned in the US.

There is no "anti-science propaganda from the far left" here. I wouldn't even know where to go to find such a thing, or why I would want to. Just an engineer who thinks we should dot all the "I"s and cross all the "T"s. You only have to look at the Gulf of Mexico to understand the necessity of that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
03:59 AM on 06/23/2010
The greatest hedge against famine due to crop disease has traditionally been genetic diversity. As genetically engineered crops take over more and more of the world's food supply, the more damage to that supply a single crop disease could do. Part of the genetic engineering includes resistance to the usual diseases, but nature is adaptive and persistent. If we keep going the way we are, world-wide famine will be a real possibility.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sheldon101
sheldon101blog.blogspot.com Wakefield transcripts
04:58 AM on 06/23/2010
The problem isn't GMO specifically, it is the attraction of higher yielding crops to farmers. With the green revolution and the new varieties of rices that allowed much higher yields, farmers stopped growing many of the local varieties. And that was well before the age of GMO seeds.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
kareemachan
watashi ha tororu ga oroka da to omoi masu。
12:15 PM on 06/23/2010
And then there's the fact that Monsanto has a lovely little habit of finding various local species, appropriating them, and then making the local farmers pay big bucks for seed that before that was free.
08:39 PM on 06/23/2010
Sheldon101

No.

GE agriculture/food does grave harm to the environment, to the viability of natural species, and to the healths of humans and other creatures; and I have posted a substantial number of comments and replies that show so. See below: on this page and on at least two others.
12:13 PM on 06/23/2010
You raise really good points. Growing plants that are not hosts to a pest has always been a good way to minimize disease. To a large extent defense against disease and pests involves crop rotation, diversity in the field and choosing defense resistant varieties. However there are certain pests that are not picky eaters. eg- corn earworm. I volunteer at an organic CSA at my university and we have tried rotating through lettuce, beans and tomato. It eats them all. Plant breeders have been unable to identify an earworm resistant variety. Conventional farmers resort to insecticides.
The bacteria Bacillus thuriengiensis (Bt) makes a protein that can target the worm. It was french farmers who first stated using Bt bacterial spores as a biopesticide in the 1920s. Its been commercially used in the US since the 1950s. Infact even organic farming permits Bt use
http://www.bt.ucsd.edu/organic_farming.html
. It still isnt all that effective because the worm bores deep into the corn and we cant access it. Which is why scientists developed the Bt- corn and Bt-cotton (which targets the cotton bollworm) within the plant. Cotton was said to be the dirtiest crop because of the use of harsh insecticides. The GM varieties have helped reduce this usage. This is another reason why GM corn/cotton is chosen by conventional farmers.
07:08 PM on 06/23/2010
daisymp

Are you a Monsanto troll? I doubt, greatly, your assertion that you volunteer (ingenuously, not dissemblingly) "at an organic CSA" [and OCA (not CSA) is the Organic Consumers Association acronym].

Your Bt arguments are false. GE created Bt corn and GE created Bt cotton are utterly distinct from any organic corn or cotton and GE created Bt corn. GE created Bt threaten the environment, agriculture, and public health, just as all other GE seed/agriculture does.

Here are just a few of many sources addressing GE agriculture's environmental and other harms:

http://aaemonline.org/gmopost.html AND other sources cited there

http://web4.uwindsor.ca/users/w/winter/Winters.nsf/0/898473597652a3bd85257070007a9000/$FILE/Clark_GMOcrops_1999.pdf

http://springerlink.com/content/9084k02167124872/

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=mlVh3ysN4ZwC&oi=fnd&pg=PA175&dq=GMO+GE+%2B+environment+%2B+soil&ots=3M5LrkvU6Q&sig=6l2SXrI7ERPkFxn2PFMIurEt2Tc#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://psrast.org/ctenvir.htm AND other sources referenced there

http://psrast.org/soilecolart.htm

http://purefood.org/GEFacts.htm

http://inmotionmagazine.com/geff4.html

http://mindfully.org/GE/GE2/Horizontal-Gene-Soil.htm

http://agrination.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35:effects-of-gmos-on-soil-fauna

ALL contrary publications/studies are produced, bought, or sponsored by Monsanto or other GM companies; and their arguments and “facts” have been proved false. See sources cited above and others they reference. All truly independent sources say either that GE foods and agriculture are unsafe or that the evidence suggests risks and does not support assertions of safety.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:09 PM on 06/22/2010
Wow! What Jan said! Agree whole heartedly.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rollingrock
07:35 PM on 06/22/2010
The Future of Food
--a must see documentary about the disturbing truth behind factory farmed mass-produced foods that have quietly filled U.S. grocery store shelves for the past decade.

www.hulu.com/watch/67878/the-future-of-food
photo
saint bernard mom
and Newfie Gram ♥spay♥neuter♥adopt♥
08:13 PM on 06/22/2010
I'm sorry, I can't watch anything after the cow abuse video. I cried for days and still have flashbacks of that poor calf being beaten. I have given up cows milk and all meat. Also, only getting eggs from a famers market. Making DH only eat meat from the farmers market. Still working on cheese. Just had a Morningstar burger today, pretty tasty.

I spend all the money we get on animal rescue so I can't contribute to animals being hurt for food.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rollingrock
08:59 PM on 06/22/2010
its a doc about GM engineered crops not livestock so don't worry there's nothing graphic in it.
01:46 PM on 06/23/2010
Milk is wholly unnecessary in our diet. The milk lobby has sold america on the idea that we as adults must drink milk everyday. Around 75% of the population is lactose intolerant and yet most still drink milk. Calcium can be found in other products, it just take a little research to end the milk habit. But then again most of Americas' eating habits is driven by corporations looking to take your hard earned money from your wallet.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StopGlobalWarmingBeVegan
★ Abolish Animal Slavery in Factory Farms ★
02:48 AM on 06/23/2010
cool
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
06:52 PM on 06/22/2010
Monsanto is a criminal organization whose negative impact on society is worse than the Mafia's.
InYourWorld
Progressive, educated, redneck but fan of no party
10:18 PM on 06/22/2010
Good thing Obama appointed one of their lobbyists to the FDA.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ergon
Man From Atlan
07:24 AM on 06/23/2010
The FDA is a revolving door organization for lobbyists and industry insiders.
InYourWorld
Progressive, educated, redneck but fan of no party
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
MaeScott
Nubian Queen
06:25 PM on 06/22/2010
Cross pollination is VERY likely, and then Monsanto comes in and sues the unknowing farmer for illegal use of their proprietary seed stock, besides. Mutant seedstock.....a dead Gulf....