New Lawsuit Filed Over GM Alfalfa

Slashfood:

The next skirmish over genetically modified foods is getting underway, pitting a coalition of environmental, consumer and food-safety groups against the federal government.

Early this year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture approved unrestricted planting of a type of GM alfalfa engineered by Monsanto. To the average consumer, that might not sound like such a big deal-after all, we're not rabbits.

Read the whole story

Comments

[NewHope360 Editor]

02:31 PM on 03/29/2011

What's scary to me is that if we don't stop the unrestricted use of genetically modified crops, we might not have access to non-GMO (or organic) foods in the future. Choice is what I care about and preserving the right to choose non-GMO products is a message I'm hoping the non-GMO community can better communicate to American consumers.
http://newhope360.com/food-and-beverage/does-non-gmo-movement-need-its-own-charlie-sheen

[benwha]

01:40 PM on 03/26/2011

Interesting, I just made a comment about China buying corn and how that undermines the anti-gmo crowd and the moderators took it off. I guess the anti-gmo moderators prefer a head in the sand approach.

[HazelPethigFan]

12:53 PM on 03/26/2011

When it comes to agriculture, the left has a lot of learning to do...and FAST. Otherwise they will look like complete buffooons.

Here is the reality of GMO for this year: The USDA recent ruling to allow farmers to use GM sugar beets is being resisted by actual beet farmers. Why? Because the farmers don't want to plant GM beets and have another legal challenge by the left wing that would make them destroy the crop in the ground. Therefore many will probably plant nonGM beets this spring. A result of which is that HARSHER herbicides than Roundup will be used. Get that?

Hasher chemicals WILL..WILL....WILL be used without GM crops. Thats' the reality..

Do urbanites understand what they have done with their anti-ag science activism? There will be harsher chemicals in runoff when nonGM crops are grown. The alternative to chemicals would be go back to thousands of migrants to do backbreaking labor in beet fields.

Is anti-science left wing prepared to really go non-chemical? Really? The urban left wingers need to then volunteer their time to beet farmers to do the increased labor needed.

What part of "grab a hoe" doesn't the urban left understand?

And by the way, don't call me a conservative. Many actual farmers are on the left and are embarrassed by the anti-science nonsense the urban left is promoting.

[Luis Rueda]

07:34 PM on 03/27/2011

I would rather Monsanto stop lobbying and allow proper labeling of GM crops. I will give you your GM crops. Just let me know. We will vote with our pockets. Let the market decide. Isn't that what right always talks about?

[benwha]

08:31 PM on 03/27/2011

It isn't that easy. Once gmo food from brazil or china hits our shores labelled as non gmo to capture the large premium, are we going to spend a lot on testing? Also, if you want to label gmo, shouldn't organic farmers label their products when they use toxic "natural" chemicals? Finally, in order to keep the comparison fair, maybe we should put estimates on greenhouse gas emissions between products so the public can release just how much less greenhouse gases are produced, per unit of yield, from gmo crops.

That's just a start, but to just say "label gmos" just ain't that easy or fair. Why not just focus on eating organic that way you have nothing to worry about?

[rikster]

04:16 PM on 03/24/2011

good..Monsanto has to be stopped from destroying our food environment...

[Photofarm]

05:43 PM on 03/25/2011

They are doing no such thing, plus you don't realize that other companies besides Monsanto are working in plant breeding and genetics, and GMO products.

[HazelPethigFan]

03:22 PM on 03/26/2011

Don't forget the many dozens of large universities doing the same thing.

But you don't see the antiGM crowd scream much on these threads about university research. Spewing Monsanto conspiracy theories is easier than to talk about science with a person who gets a PhD in Plant Pathology degree from Iowa State.

[SanJoaquinValleyGrower]

04:10 PM on 03/24/2011

Good. A coexistence strategy is what the USDA should have negotiated to begin with. Unrestricted planting would be the death knell for the Organic Dairy industry. The USDA has no right to put one section of agriculture out of business just to favor another.

This is not about science, and not about production needs of conventional dairies. It is a flat out market based scheme to shut the growing Organic dairy industry down. If conventional dairies demand 100% weed free alfalfa (which they don't), then they should be forced to work with alfalfa growers that supply the other end of the market.

[Photofarm]

05:46 PM on 03/25/2011

What a bunch of nonsense, the market place would probably allow both types of alfalfa. There are a lot of farmers that are not using Roundup, or they are using other herbicides along with roundup. It doesn't matter what type of weed control program you use, some weeds will thrive on it and other weeds will be controlled.

[SanJoaquinValleyGrower]

10:06 PM on 03/25/2011

Alfalfa here in my area (the largest alfalfa growing area in California) is regularly strip planted with cotton as a trap crop for lygus moth, the main cotton pest. That alfalfa must be allowed to flower for this to work well. Cotton is the main rotation crop for alfalfa (2nd is silage corn), and it is the norm to have an alfalfa field next to a cotton field. This area in California is the source of most alfalfa seed, at least for our state.

Assuming you're a grower, I'm sure you understand that when two fields of flowering alfalfa are within pollination distance of each other, there is little that can be done to stop all migration of pollen. A two mile distance between fields is nothing for pollinator insects, especially lygus moth.

Seed planted for Organically grown alfalfa is usually untreated conventional. That is what I did myself. When, not if, alfalfa seed that is GM contaminated enters the conventional untreated supply chain, Organic hay guys will be screwed, because then the seed must be tested, thereby increasing input costs. That might work financially for a while, until it becomes impossible to source uncontaminated, untreated seed. Then, we will be forced to buy only Certified Organic alfalfa seed. Most commodity crops that are planted for Organic production are not Certified, only untreated, because it is too cost prohibitive.

Don't tell me the people behind pushing GM alfalfa are not very well aware of this.

[freedom4allau]

11:22 PM on 03/23/2011

No GM grains...period. And I grew up a farmer.

[Photofarm]

05:47 PM on 03/25/2011

That is a really stupid position, for someone that should know better.

[freedom4allau]

09:24 PM on 03/25/2011

That's why I hold the position I do. Did you grow up as a farmer??

[freedom4allau]

09:28 PM on 03/25/2011

Cross pollination is fine - we did that a lot but, when you start messing around with the genetic makeup to alter the plants' natural structure, then you're treading in a field that no one knows what may happen down the track. Are you willing to take the chance of destroying the food sources in the world?

[lily]

10:16 PM on 03/23/2011

The Obama administration: Making the world safe for rich criminals, one corporation at a time.

[HazelPethigFan]

10:25 PM on 03/23/2011

I see this thread will soon be full of the usual anti-ag science cliches and rants.

Only one line though? Is that all you got?

[Mother77]

10:49 PM on 03/23/2011

Animals given the choice of GMO food and non-GMO-food will always choose the non-GMO food. Humans are not as bright. There, that was two lines.

[Dr Juan]

11:08 PM on 03/23/2011

Bush: "Leave no billionaire behind"

[HenryDavid]

05:33 AM on 03/27/2011

Perfect! And in that case, he means it.

[Dr Juan]

09:25 PM on 03/23/2011

Someone should sue Monsanto for contaminating all the field crops with their GMO genetics, because it spreads beyond just the seed they are selling. Even the Amish have the genome in some of their crops and they never bought Monsanto seed or ever use their herbicide.

Food we eat should be optimized for nutrition, not yield, shippability and herbicide resistance.

[HazelPethigFan]

09:57 PM on 03/23/2011

many Amish use GMO voluntarily.

Perhaps you should get view this:

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

[Mother77]

10:50 PM on 03/23/2011

Just because the Amish do it, we should think it's okay? No. I don't wear long dresses and ride around in buggies either.

[Dr Juan]

11:06 PM on 03/23/2011

Interesting - I was not aware some were using GM corn resistant to corn borer. The toxins that kill corn borers apparently have not caused immediate problems with cattle and humans that consume the milk and meat - yet. The operative word being "yet".

Roundup resistant soybean is another matter that seems to already be controversial since that genome moves around allowing Monsanto to sue if you use your own seed from fields grown near a Monsanto GM crop.

[Photofarm]

05:56 AM on 03/25/2011

Actually they are working on those traits as well, and for the most part, most of the GM work is done using the plants own genes. They are just speeding up the selection process of favored traits over past selection techinques.