More

Judge Jeffrey White Orders Plants That Provide GMO Sugar Beet Seeds To Be Destroyed

MICHAEL J. CRUMB   12/ 3/10 11:24 AM ET   AP

Biotech Beets

DES MOINES, Iowa — A federal judge in California has ordered the removal from the ground of plants grown to produce seeds for genetically modified sugar beets, citing the potential for environmental harm.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White has again raised questions about the use of genetically modified crops and what will happen if growers aren't allowed to plant GMO seeds.

About 95 percent of the sugar beet crop has been genetically modified to resist the weed killer Roundup. The crop provides roughly half of the nation's sugar supply.

In his decision, White cited, "a significant risk of environmental harm."

White ruled in a lawsuit filed by environmental groups challenging a decision in September by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services to issue permits to seed companies to plant sugar beet stecklings. The young plants produce seeds that then are planted to grow sugar beets.

The agency decided to issue the permits despite an August ruling by White that put a hold on future planting of genetically modified sugar beets. The ruling allowed this year's crop to be harvested and processed, but the current seed crop was not to be planted until the USDA reviewed the effects the crops could have on other food.

In his order Tuesday, White wrote that the environmental groups had shown that the genetically modified sugar beets could contaminate other crops, including through cross-pollination.

"The likely environmental harm . . . is irreparable," White wrote.

The plants in question would produce seeds for crops to be planted in the spring of 2012. Crops that will be planted next spring won't be affected by the decision.

Analysts have said an inability to plant genetically altered sugar beets would likely force a big jump in sugar imports and increased prices.

The defendants in the case filed a request for an emergency stay of White's ruling, saying that without it, the sugar beet industry would suffer "massive harm . . . and very likely lead to its demise in the Western Plains and Northwest where farmers on dependent on the technology for their livelihoods."

The request filed last Thursday in U.S. District Court in California said uprooting the stecklings would create an unavailability of seeds for sugar beets in 2012, resulting in $482 million in damages to the industry.

It also stated that it would destroy millions of dollars spent by the companies on research and development and hinder an effective appeal.

"We believe the court's action overlooked the factual evidence presented that no harm would be caused by these plantings," said David Snively, general counsel for Monsanto, in a written statement. "We intend to seek an immediate stay of this ruling and appeal to the Court of Appeals."

Monstanto is joined by American Crystal Sugar Company, Syngenta Seeds and Betaseed Inc., in seeking the stay.

Luther Markwart, executive vice president of the American Sugar Beet Growers Association, said the group was not a party in the lawsuit and that the potential impact on the sugar beet crop in 2012 wasn't yet known.

"But clearly, the bottom line is we disagree with what the court ruled," Markwart said.

Sugar beets are planted on more than 1 million acres in 10 states, with Minnesota, North Dakota and Idaho being the top producers.

The judge said the USDA failed to conduct the environmental review he demanded in his August ruling before issuing permits authorizing the planting of the seed plants.

The August ruling came after a challenge by the environmental groups to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services' deregulation of genetically modified sugar beets. The beets have been planted in the U.S. for four years.

The government sought a stay of White's decision, but he denied the request.

"We are now in discussion with the Department of Justice and we are exploring all options," said APHIS spokesman Andre Bell.

As part of White's ruling, a preliminary injunction against planting the seed plants will take effect Dec. 6.

George Kimbrell, an attorney for the Centers for Food Safety, one of the leading groups challenging the USDA's deregulation of genetically modified sugar beets, called White's ruling a "groundbreaking victory for farmers and the environment.

"This is the first time ever a federal court ordered an illegal biotech crop destroyed," he said.

Paul Atchitoff, of Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm that acted as lead counsel in the lawsuit, said White's ruling is "an indication that the government needs to start doing its job. The USDA needs to stop ignoring the environmental laws regarding genetically modified crops."

Atchitoff said APHIS' decision to issue permits to plant stecklings came less than a month after White ruled the beets could not be grown.

"The government's conduct is really outrageous," he said. "The court had just said in August the beets could not be grown and the government turned around and gave the industry the opportunity to grow them."

White's ruling followed the release by APHIS of a preliminary plan to let farmers plant genetically modified sugar beets until a lawsuit is resolved. The 365-page report suggested farmers be allowed to plant Roundup Ready sugar beets under a closely monitored permit process to prevent contamination of other crops. Monitoring by APHIS was one of three options outlined in the report and the one preferred by federal officials.

The USDA established a 30-day period for public comment on the plan, which ends Dec. 6, the same date when the injunction granted by the California judge takes effect.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

DES MOINES, Iowa — A federal judge in California has ordered the removal from the ground of plants grown to produce seeds for genetically modified sugar beets, citing the potential for environme...
DES MOINES, Iowa — A federal judge in California has ordered the removal from the ground of plants grown to produce seeds for genetically modified sugar beets, citing the potential for environme...
Filed by Travis Donovan  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 611
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (11 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
latoussaint
Truths and roses have thorns about them.-HDT
11:57 PM on 12/19/2010
THANK YOU, Judge Jeffrey White! You are a wise man and a hero to the world! What a brave man fighting those nasty and evil corporations, put Monsanto in their place!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KarlaElisa
The atmosphere is Toxic
03:48 PM on 12/19/2010
Dec 19th diplomatic cables heavy on protecting and advancing Monsanto's 'rights' in Europe and talk of making things 'painful' for those resisting. The 1st one out of Paris is a must read but others shed a good sliver of light on how we work for Monsanto: http://wikileaks.ch/reldate/2010-12-19_0.html
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:27 PM on 12/19/2010
Thanks for this link. It is the first of the Wikileaks I've actually seen. Since it's about an issue which interests me a lot, it has added value. I'm beginning to see the special relevance Wikileaks can provide.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Florence Baumgartner
04:14 PM on 12/10/2010
one nice petition here against GMO

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/6236/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=4158
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KarlaElisa
The atmosphere is Toxic
03:49 PM on 12/19/2010
check out yesterdays cables on our pressuring france, spain and others to plant bt corn and other monsanto crops or fear retaliation: http://wikileaks.ch/reldate/2010-12-19_0.html
photo
Libertarian09
Anti War Socialist with a taste for freedom
04:02 PM on 12/19/2010
Pretty despicable stuff, both the content of the cables and the products from monsanto. Every one of these cables I look at further increases my belief that government is beyond redemption.

Still working through the fertileground stuff, some very interesting things, thanks again for pointing it out to me
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:11 PM on 12/08/2010
God bless this judge for the wise and practical ruling he made. I consider it a great Christmas present toward the health of the U.S. populace.

The USDA seems to be still controlled by corporate interests. It was worse under Bush, but the plastic food policies are still being continued. Perhaps, some of the executives put in power by Bush are still there, and Obama has been ordered not to replace them. (Corporate sponsors can be demanding for all the PAC money they provide politicians.)

It's also discouraging to see that the Bill Gates foundation bought 500,000 shares of Monsanto in August. So, the big money is all in it together. Reminds me of Warren Buffet's comment about investing, to the effect that you can't let morality get in the way when you want to make money on investments. (That was in reference to all the tobacco stocks in his investment group's portfolio.)

I know Monsanto employees would like to keep their high-paying positions, but to do so at the expense of national and world health is simply wrong.
11:14 PM on 12/08/2010
So you are so sure that Bill Gates as it wrong huh? That GMO is totally 100% bad for our health and that Bill Gates has seen the science and has concluded that it is ok to poison the population so he can make even more millions in a portfolio worth trillions? Has it ever occurred to you that he has brought his tremendous resources to bear and determined the risks of GMO's are worth it or are you so sure he is just concerned about makinfg a buck at the expense of everyone's health because he is some sociopath? Bottom-line, have you ever considered that YOU have it wrong and BILL GATES has it right?
photo
Libertarian09
Anti War Socialist with a taste for freedom
04:04 PM on 12/19/2010
"It was worse under Bush"... what a load of bullcrap, nothing has changed unless it has gotten worse. Defend Obama if you wish, I have no doubt he is complicit
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
06:29 PM on 12/19/2010
Easy. Take a deep breath and read slowly so you can comprehend better. As I wrote,
"The USDA seems to be still controlled by corporate interests. It was worse under Bush, but the plastic food policies are still being continued."

That is no defense of Obama. Read further,
"Perhaps, some of the executives put in power by Bush are still there, and Obama has been ordered not to replace them."
Now, listen carefully, Bush and Obama are Tweedledum and Tweedledee. They are controlled by corporate interests...in this case, part of the agricultural business. Bush was in office for 8 years so he had a chance to do more damage. Obama's only had 2 years--he can still do a lot more damage.

Defending Obama? It sounds like you're a bit trigger-happy.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dannywanny
10:42 PM on 12/05/2010
My personal experience indicates that there is a significant difference between baked goods using beet sugar and cane sugar. Beet sugar produces a gummy, grainy texture and doesn't caramelize. Why, I dont know. That finding has been verified by several tests over the last year by the local newspaper food editor staff, local culinary schools and professional bakers. I need to know where my sugar comes from, beets or cane.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
07:58 AM on 12/06/2010
Who needs real scientists when there is a "newspaper food editor staff" to tell us everything.

hahahahahahahahahahaha
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
05:02 PM on 12/06/2010
I can't imagine why you think it's funny that people who actually know something about cooking can tell the difference between the way different sugars react.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dannywanny
09:03 PM on 12/07/2010
Oh, Hazel, there you are. I thought you'd left us. I should have known if there was anything on Huff Post to deny that you'd be there to do it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
10:18 PM on 12/06/2010
Wow -- that's really interesting. I know we much prefer real brown cane sugar to the cheaper stuff on oatmeal and pancakes at our house. I'll have to try a test with something.
12:47 AM on 12/07/2010
I hate to be the bearer of bad news but gmo sugar cane is coming soon, and brazil supports it hook line and sinker
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dannywanny
08:56 PM on 12/07/2010
Try caramelizing some beet sugar. It won't.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
07:06 PM on 12/05/2010
Let's see...

On the proGM side there are real plant scientists like Nobel Peace Prize winner Norman Borlaug.(PhD Plant pathology 1942 University of Minnesota). He was very proGMO and bred wheat before current GMO science even existed. That wheat saved 1 Billion people from starvation. Yes, 1 BILLION people. Look it up. He was very strongly in favor of GMO. It is truley breathtaking to watch you antiGM people with no plant science training and no farm background being critical of his work. Unbelievable. Just unbelievable.

Then there are most of the U.S. farmers who are very proGM. You antiGM people just can't get over that fact that most farmers are proGM can you? Yes....it's alllll a Monsantooooo conspiracy.......LOL

Truely you antiScience, antiGM people are as bad as the people who deny global warming. You are all really the same aren't you? ;^)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
08:24 PM on 12/05/2010
Dear heavens, there's a difference between traditional plant breeding and artificial genetic manipulation.

There's also a huge difference between modifications that will help crops resist diseases or increase yields and modifications that mainly increase corporate profits. Studies on genetically modified soybeans, for example, aren't conclusive. While farmers reduced the need for tillage, some studies showed that they were using much more herbicide and not increasing yields.

Plus researchers are finding rogue canola that can resist at least 2 types of herbicides. Think that won't happen with weeds pretty soon?

What do you think Dr. Borlaug would have thought about Monsanto's terminator seeds? Or the way they sue people who try to use their own seed instead of Monsanto's product?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
elcerritan
My bio is not micro
05:11 PM on 12/06/2010
Do you think all GMO is "created equal"? Borlaug did plant hybridization, which is not the current type of genetic modification that's of concern to many people.

Do you think the farmers who have been sued by Monsanto for patent infringement when their crops are pollinated (against the farmers' will) by pollen from their neighbors' GMO crops are unqualifiedly pro-GMO?

And no, people who are concerned about GMO crops are not the same as climate change deniers. I suspect there's a bigger overlap between climate-change deniers and pro-GMO folks than there is between climate-change deniers and anti-GMO folks.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:04 PM on 12/06/2010
hazel the pig isn't a farmer or a scientist . She/He is a paid hack who makes lame arguments over and over again on this site in order to distract from the real issue. Keep arguing and link after link to monsanto friendly reports by other paid hacks will show up. Science magazine brought together a bunch of unimaginative Scientists to say GMO will cure world hunger and that article too will appear. It's enough Bulls**t to put the chemical fertilizer industry out of business. I'm not anti-science, I'm anti B.S.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rivrgrrl
Our Constitution trumps your Bible.
04:54 PM on 12/05/2010
Finally, a judge brave enough to stand up to Big Ag and their government coconspirators.

Franken foods are not the answer to our food problems/issues.

Isn't inserting the gene of a spider into a tomato to make it a better tomato playing God? God supposedly gave us everything we would need on this Earth; why should we have to alter/improve? on God's creation?

Where is the outrage from the ReligiousRight?

Thank you Judge White, may there be more of you willing to follow suit.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
01:16 PM on 12/05/2010
According to Purdue University's Horticultural site, weeds can be controlled in sugar beet fields by:
1) crop rotation with wheat, barley and other crops that can be sprayed for broad-leafed weeds (ever notice that a well-weeded garden has fewer weeds the next year?)
2) cultivation between the rows in the early stages of growth
3) hand weeding problem areas
4) applying herbicide just as the weeds are coming up but the beets have yet to emerge.

The site notes that herbicide use is creating a problem with herbicide-resistant varieties of weeds.

It also notes that the tops and small beets make good forage for livestock -- how will the GMO variety affect animal health and meat quality?

And finally, the sugar beet industry in the US has been declining. "About 1,400,000 acres were produced in 14 states in 1990. Canada produces sugarbeets in Manitoba and Alberta. Russia leads worldwide production of sugarbeets with nearly 8,500,000 acres followed by Poland, France, West Germany and Turkey with about 1,000,000 acres each. The United States beet sugar industry has experienced great change in the last three decades. A total of 10 beet processors operated 53 factories in 18 states in 1973 while nine companies operated only 36 factories in the United States in 1990."
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/afcm/sugarbeet.html
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
03:07 PM on 12/05/2010
Gee..crop rotation? What novel idea. No farmer has EVER heard of that one before. ;-/ Thanks for the lecture. I assume you are a nonfarmer by the way you write.

And you accept spraying herbicides apparently, but with more hazardous chemicals instead of RoundUp. Why? That's strange logic. nonRoundup chemicals used on various crops can be things like alachor and 2,4-D (part of agent orange). They are more hazardous than Roundup. Didn't your website tell you that one? It's very very strange that you want beet farmers to spray more hazardous chemicals on the land.

Hand weeding? Am I to assume you have no problem volunteering your labor to hand weed crops for beet farmers? Have you ever done weeding on a large scale? I am not talking about a weeding an urban microgarden here. I am talking day after day in the hot sun. I've done plenty of hand weeding myself.

Something tells me the urbannites lecturing farmers on this website have never done any real farmwork..ever. I am not talking about taking care of 12 sweet corn plants in an urban microgarden.

Beet farming has a long history of backbreaking hand labor. Please google this topic. We've gone away from back breaking labor. That's just a fact of life. You want to return to those days? Go do it then. What are you waiting for? Go help a beet farmer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
04:06 PM on 12/05/2010
Why are you sneering at crop rotation? Yes, it's been around since at least the middle ages and most small farmers still do it because it does work to maintain fertility and reduce weed problems.

Who said anything about more dangerous chemicals than RoundUp? That's one of the ones that could be used on weeds before the sugarbeets come up. Alachor and 2,4-D were NOT mentioned.

I grew up on a grain farm. I helped my mother with a very large garden and walked with my dad when he "rogued" his certified seed fields. I have two brothers and a nephew farming -- family farms, not corporate factory farms.

Farming IS hard work. All the push-button, labour-saving big machinery and big chemical solutions have their own costs to the environment and sometimes to productivity. Bigger machinery puts more marginal land (sloughs, hillsides) into production and increase erosion. Artificial inputs are hard on the soil, on the natural ecosystem, on the water supply we consume. Monoculture has myriad problems.

I know darn well that farmers have to adapt to changing markets, changing soil and changing environment -- but Monsanto is not necessarily helping with its modifications. Some of them -- like the terminator crops -- are strictly to give Monsanto a strangle-hold over global food supplies.

Read the fine print before you jump on the bandwagon, Hazel.

PS -- look outside. It's winter. The nearest sugarbeets are probably in Australia.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nomadrdw
Zen Druid
05:30 PM on 12/06/2010
and allowing a dieing industry to contaminate the natural world with out regard for that natural world is the ultimate danger that you don't seem to understand. once we allow alien life into the environment, it becomes totally impossible to control.
second, any farmer worth their land will be the first to tell you using an herbicide only makes the surviving weeds more and more resistant to the chemical, and so you need to use more and more each year to get the same results.

so your derision of tried and proven crop rotation proves to me that you have no idea of what you are talking about.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:29 PM on 12/05/2010
Monsanto's controls a HUGE majority of our food . The world over . If this infrastructure goes unchecked ( as it has for years) the long term implications are beyond our capacity to grasp or to deal with . ( how has our response been to any disaster as of late? ) This is a criminal manipulation of our agricultural infrastructure . CRIMINAL !!!!!!
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
03:38 PM on 12/05/2010
nonsense
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nomadrdw
Zen Druid
05:32 PM on 12/06/2010
foolish short sightedness on the part of someone that does not even begin to grasp the science. how insightful, please share your wisdom with the third world instead of trying to impress those of us that are educated on the subject.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dannywanny
09:17 PM on 12/07/2010
Hazel. you're so funny! LOL.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amber15
08:39 PM on 12/07/2010
yes, your right. Thankfully Monsanto's profits have dropped substantially this year so our outrage is obviously shared.
11:25 AM on 12/05/2010
What if Huffpost deleted all entries that did not point to scientific evidence? How many of you know more about GM than the judge who acted for the people? The opinions of the vast majority of bloggers just don't mean anything. IMHO.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
03:35 PM on 12/05/2010
"What if Huffpost deleted all entries that did not point to scientific evidence?"

that's funny...

Then all the antiGM comments would be deleted. You science denying antiGmers have no scientific evidence yourselves. There is planty of science behind GM. It's been around for decades.

Nobel Peace Prize winner Norman Borlaug (who saved 1 billion people from starvation through plant breeding), had this to say about GMO:

http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/topics/borlaug/doomsayers.html

"NAIROBI, Kenya -- Nobel Prize laureate, Dr Norman E. Borlaug, has defended the utilisation of Genetically Modified Organisms or GMOs to boost food production in the world.

He told a forum organised in his honour at the Nairobi International Centre for Research in Agriculture and Forestry Monday that such organisms could play a key role in bringing about food security.

"There is no evidence to indicate that biotechnology is dangerous. After all, mother nature has been doing this kind of thing for God knows how long," he said. Told a packed hall consisting of researchers and food scientists in the Kenyan capital.

He dismissed the critics of GMOs as people who had not produced even a kg of food and yet were yelping about bio-safety and the dangers involved in the technology."


He knew quite a bit about plant breeding. He was an expert in fact. Saving 1 billion (yes, 1 BILLION) people gives him cred.

The antiGM people on this website probably barely passed high school biology.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nomadrdw
Zen Druid
05:45 PM on 12/06/2010
once again, you are showing an ignorance of the subject. you would use for your so called evidence something that happened even before DNA was discovered. your so called 'BILLION PEOPLE SAVED" actually happened because of traditional plant breeding and cross breeding, not because of genetically modified plants.
you rant about GMO's being around for decades, when in fact the first GMO's were introduced in 1996.
uneducated people are a constant danger to the world, and those that think they know science but don't even begin to bother learning are the most dangerous.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
05:19 PM on 12/05/2010
"What if Huffpost deleted all entries that did not point to scientific evidence?"

Very funny..

If HPost were to delete those comments there would be no comments by antiGM people since none of what they say is based on any science. AntiGM people sound like the global warming deniers.

How about the following scientist who spent years breeding plants and saving people from starvation:

http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/topics/borlaug/doomsayers.html
"NAIROBI, Kenya -- Nobel Prize laureate, Dr Norman E. Borlaug, has defended the utilisation of Genetically Modified Organisms or GMOs to boost food production in the world.

He told a forum organised in his honour at the Nairobi International Centre for Research in Agriculture and Forestry Monday that such organisms could play a key role in bringing about food security.

"There is no evidence to indicate that biotechnology is dangerous. After all, mother nature has been doing this kind of thing for God knows how long," he said. Told a packed hall consisting of researchers and food scientists in the Kenyan capital.

He dismissed the critics of GMOs as people who had not produced even a kg of food and yet were yelping about bio-safety and the dangers involved in the technology.

Borlaug, who received a Nobel Peace in 1970 for his efforts to feed a hungry world"


Borlaug save 1 billion people from starvation by breeding wheat plants. Yes..1 billion people.
He has the credibility to talk GMO.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
09:39 AM on 12/05/2010
Here's proof how wrong Huffpost and it's antiGM readers really are:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7742471.stm
Amish farmers embrace GM crops

Even Amish now use GMO. Incredible.

Here's an Amish farmers quote from this BBC report when asked about what he thought about people who are against GMO: "They are misinformed and they don't know what they are talking about"

He's being too kind in my opinion. I think the new gap-toothed back/wwards people are antiGM urban people who read Huffpost. These gap-toothed people read it for next back-/wards antiGM talking point that even an 8 year farm kid can laugh at.

Yes , antiGM urbannites are the new reddnnecks. What's next? An urbannite version of HeeHaw?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:32 PM on 12/05/2010
Farmer against GMO'S . Just because the Amish guy drank the cool aide !! They don't shower much either , I am not sure I would follow their lead in anything . ( they don't get laid much either)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
01:29 PM on 12/05/2010
It depends on the purpose of the genetic modification, Hazel. And it all needs testing and PROOF that it is helpful and causes NO harm.

"Dienner is one of about 550 Amish farmers in Pennsylvania who have been growing a genetically enhanced, nicotine-free tobacco plant since 2001. Other Amish farmers have been growing a biotech potato, which is resistant to pests and viruses, on a test basis."

Insect-resistant plants can chase away the good bugs as well as the bad.

Even crops designed for drought survival may have long term bad effects: lowering the water table, replacing indigenous species as an invasive weed, reducing genetic diversity, etc.

Considering that Monsanto pioneered "terminal crops" -- plants that do no produce viable seed so that farmers are forced to buy new seed only from Monsanto (i.e., agricultural slavery) -- is it any wonder that people are suspicious of any new "wonder plant" that this company comes up with?
mothergrace
If they knock you down, bite 'em on the ankle.
06:20 PM on 12/04/2010
I would like to ask, since GMO sugar beets have been around for such a short time, (they were initially approved in 2008) how is it that there will be such a shortage of seed for the spring of 2012?

If nothing else it should give us pause that a corporation can take over any portion of the food supply in such a short time.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
09:42 PM on 12/04/2010
How true. Monsanto and other companies must be prevented from holding food supplies hostage.

We here in North America need our own Gandhi to show us how to throw off the imperialistic monopolies. Maybe it will be Judge White.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:55 PM on 12/04/2010
Allowing Monsanto into the neighborhood has proven very bad for small farmers in the Midwest and Canada. Once their crops are ruined by the Monsanto GMO crop, they are then sued by Monsanto for using patented seeds. They are ruining our food supply one state at a time, along with the other big corporations that hold patents on seeds. This is the first instance in history that a form of *life* has been patented.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
05:21 PM on 12/04/2010
Seems to me farmers have been doing very well this year. Small and big. Most use those eeevvil GM plants. Perhaps you need to talk to them sometime and learn about the world outside antimodern agriculture blogs like HPost and one-sided propaganda films like Food Inc. There are even a few farmers posting here. I am usually the obnoxious one, but I am worn out from reading all the bizarre antiGM comments. The other farmers posting on HPost are much nicer than me.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
MJinCanada
Safe from zombies until my 2nd cup of coffee
09:45 PM on 12/04/2010
Well, you don't know many farmers on the Canadian prairies then. The GM-contaminated crops is a sore issue -- partly because the Round-up resistant canola, which looked like a good idea 30 years ago, is becoming a weed problem itself. Aside from that, spring flooding, fall rains and early frost have really hit a lot of farmers.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:34 PM on 12/05/2010
So sorry you drank the Kool aide to buddy !! I am a farmer and you must be on the take buddy. They are criminals , sorry , your not my farmer !
03:07 PM on 12/04/2010
Well then let's grow Energy Beets for ethanol..... Same seed companies.... And it will make our fuel cheaper than corn ethanol. imagine ethanol prices at $ 1.90..... Sweet.....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:35 PM on 12/05/2010
Sorry net energy loss . How many gallons of water would it take to grow a gallon of ethanol .
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nomadrdw
Zen Druid
06:00 PM on 12/06/2010
over 100 gallons of just water, and that is just to grow the corn, not including processing of the ethanol.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BannedNBoston
Is hemp legal yet?
02:42 PM on 12/04/2010
Yes lets eat less sugar!!!
Boycott Ben and Jerrys and Hagendaz too.

http://www.activistpost.com/2010/12/why-tester-amendment-does-not-help.html
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
04:55 PM on 12/04/2010
Don't forget Trader Joes Trail Mix granola cereal and nonfat yogurt. Both loaded with sugar for the clueless urbanites
mothergrace
If they knock you down, bite 'em on the ankle.
06:00 PM on 12/04/2010
The sugar in the TJ Trek Mix Granola Simply Almonds, Cashews and Cranberries is 12 g. for a 1/2 cup serving-quite low in sugar.

The "sugars" in the non-fat yogurt is from the lactose present in the milk, NOT added sugar.

Why am I not surprised you do not tell the whole story?
mothergrace
If they knock you down, bite 'em on the ankle.
06:23 PM on 12/04/2010
TJ's Trek Mix Granola Simply Almonds, etc. only has 12 gr. of sugar per 1/2 cup serving. Very low.

And the SUGARS in the yogurt are from the LACTOSE in the milk, NOT added sugars.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
05:05 PM on 12/04/2010
Oops and forgot all the sugar laden Kashi stuff too.
mothergrace
If they knock you down, bite 'em on the ankle.
06:02 PM on 12/04/2010
Kashi?

Why would anyone eat that c_rap from Kellogg's who have defiantly, despite consumer objections, filled their products with GMO.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amber15
08:42 PM on 12/07/2010
blathering all over the place yields you more crazy comments than ever,
your boat is sinking.....