Stop the Biotech Rider!

The biotech, or "Monsanto" rider is back!  Originally in legislation last summer, this industry-driven rider would not only allow, but require the Secretary of Agriculture to grant a temporary permit for the planting or cultivation of a genetically engineered crop, even if a federal court has ordered the planting be halted until an Environmental Impact Statement is completed. This means that biotech companies would be able to temporarily override a federal court ruling, effectively placing them in a position of greater power than the court itself. All they have to do is ask.

If passed, this provision will undermine the fundamental safeguards of our judicial system, and will negatively effect farmers, the environment, and public health across America. The rider will give the biotech industry a way to circumvent federal court orders and serves to give the industry assurances that aren't needed.

Tell your Senators to demand that Appropriations Chairwoman Mikulski pull this dangerous and unconstitutional rider, and support Senator Tester's amendment  (#74), co-sponsored by Senators Boxer (D-CA), Gillibrand (D-NY), and Leahy (D-VT), that would strike the rider from the Continuing Resolution.

We can't allow the biotech industry to subvert our judicial and political system. Thank you for taking time from your busy day to make this important call!

Find your Senator's number here

 

You can also call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202)224-3121 and ask for your Senator's Office, or send a letter telling your Senator to support the Tester amendment by filling out the online letter here. Learn more about the biotech rider and the Tester amendment on the Beyond Pesticides website here.

Organic Farmers' Suit Against Monsanto Dismissed

Judge Sides with Monsanto in Lawsuit   

Ridicules Connecticut NOFA Farmers' Right to Grow Food without Genetic Contamination and Economic Harm

New York, NY - Judge Naomi Buchwald's February 24 decision dismissing the case of Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association et al v. Monsanto was met with great disappointment by organic farmers, seed growers and agricultural organizations, including CT NOFA—and a renewed commitment to fight on.

Daniel Ravicher, lead attorney for the 81 plaintiffs represented in the lawsuit, said, "While I have great respect for Judge Buchwald, her decision to deny farmers the right to seek legal protection from one of the world's foremost patent bullies is gravely disappointing."

"Her belief," added Ravicher, "that farmers are acting unreasonably when they stop growing certain crops to avoid being sued by Monsanto for patent infringement, should their crops become contaminated, maligns the intelligence and integrity of those farmers." 

Ravicher said the judge failed to address the purpose of the Declaratory Judgment Act and mischaracterized the Supreme Court precedent that supports the farmers' standing.  "In sum, her opinion is flawed on both the facts and the law.  Thankfully, the plaintiffs have the right to proceed to the Court of Appeals, which will review the matter without deference to her findings," the attorney said.

Monsanto's history of aggressive investigations and lawsuits brought against farmers in America has been a source of concern for organic and non-GMO agricultural producers since Monsanto's first lawsuit brought against a farmer in the mid-‘90s.  Since then, 144 farmers have had lawsuits filed against them by Monsanto for alleged violations of their patented seed technology.  

Monsanto has sued more than 700 additional farmers who have settled out-of-court rather than face Monsanto's belligerent, and well-financed, litigious actions. 

Many of these farmers claim to not have had the intention to grow or save seeds that contain Monsanto's patented genes. Seed contamination and pollen drift from genetically engineered crops often migrate to neighboring fields. If Monsanto's seed technology is found on a farmer's land without a contract the farmer can be found liable for patent infringement.

"Family farmers need the protection of the court," said Maine organic seed farmer Jim Gerritsen, President of the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association, the lead plaintiff. 

Gerritsen added, "We reject as naïve and indefensible the judge's assertion that Monsanto's vague public relations 'commitment [not to sue farmers for 'trace amounts' of their seeds are genetically engineered traits], should be 'a source of comfort' to plaintiffs. The truth is we are under threat and we do not believe Monsanto." 

The plaintiffs brought the suit against Monsanto to seek judicial protection from such lawsuits and challenge the validity of Monsanto's patents on seeds.

"Monsanto is the big biotechnology bully and has used the courts, for years, to intimidate farmers," said Mark A. Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst at The Cornucopia Institute, another plaintiff.  "The purpose of our lawsuit is to preemptively challenge its reign of intimidation over organic farmers, and others, who have chosen not to jump on their genetically engineered bandwagon."

Another plaintiff, organic farmer Bryce Stephens of Kansas, added, "As a citizen and property owner, I find the Order by the Federal Court to be obsequious to Monsanto."

"Seeds are the memory of life," said Isaura Anduluz of plaintiff Cuatro Puertas in New Mexico.  "If planted and saved annually, cross pollination ensures the seeds continue to adapt. In the Southwest, selection over many, many generations has resulted in native drought tolerant corn.  Now that a [Monsanto's] patented drought tolerant corn has been released how do we protect our seeds from contamination and our right to farm?"

A copy of Judge Buchwald's ruling is located here

 To learn more about the lawsuit, come to Dan Ravicher's workshop at the CT NOFA Winter Conference this Saturday, March 3 at Manchester Community College.

OSGATA et al v. Monsanto In Depth

The following is an excerpt from our Executive Director, Bill Duesing's, article in our newest edition of the Gleanings eNewsletter that was released today.  In the article, Bill details his visit to Manhattan on Tuesday to support farmers who are trying to prevent Monsanto from suing them for patent infringement.  If you would like to read the full newsletter, click here.  If you'd like to sign up to receive our monthly eNews, click here.

A GMO Hearing and Wingnuts
February 1, 2012

activists outside the courthouse

Yesterday I had the honor of representing CT NOFA and its members at a hearing, in the Southern District Court in lower Manhattan, on Monsanto's motion to dismiss our suit asking the court to prevent Monsanto from suing farmers whose crops are contaminated by Monsanto's modified genes. (See this document for more information on the lawsuit, including a list and descriptions of our co-plaintiffs.)
 
I joined 54 other organic and non-GMO farmers, representatives of organic farming organizations and organic seed producers before 7 AM in order to get a seat in the courtroom. We came from 20 different states and one Canadian province. Although there was no opportunity for us to speak, our attorney felt it was important to show the judge that there are real people behind the law suit. There was standing room only in the courtroom. Monsanto's only supporters were its four attorneys.
 
After about three hours of waiting... Read more here!

In the following video, Dan Ravicher explains what OSGATA et al v. Monsanto is all about.  The video is a little long, but gives a really good explanation that's easy to understand for those of us who aren't familiar with legalese. 


These resources help to explain why this lawsuit is important, and give an idea of what the outcome will mean for both farmers and consumers.  If you want to learn more about activism surrounding this case, check out the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association's website.

You can also read two articles in the news about Tuesday's event here and here.

Update: A Citizen's Assembly of Support for Family Farmers vs. Monsanto

Community members assembled early this morning.

At 9:00 am this morning community members and stakeholders assembled outside of the Southern District Court in New York City to announce a public message that they stand behind family farmers as they go to court with Monsanto.  The lead plaintiffs in the case stated, " In the past two decades, Monsanto’s seed monopoly has grown so powerful that they control the genetics of nearly 90% of five major commodity crops including corn, soybeans, cotton, canola and sugar beets. This has resulted in onerous costs to farmers through high technology patent fees for seeds as well as burdensome litigation costs in defending themselves against lawsuits asserted by Monsanto.  In many cases organic and conventional farmers are forced to stop growing certain crops in order to avoid genetic contamination and potential lawsuits."  In response to the injustice leveraged on farmers by Monsanto, the Organic Seed Growers and Traders Association has filed suit against Monsanto.

Activists rallied after the court hearing.

The lawsuit OSGATA (Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association) et al vs. Monsanto was filed on behalf of 300,000 organic and non-GMO farmers and citizens to seek judicial relief in "protect[ing] themselves from ever being accused of infringing patents on transgenic (GMO) seed". The judge has requested and agreed to hear oral argument in orders to make a decision of whether or not to allow the farmers’ case to move forward in the courts after Monsanto filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Supporters of farmers’ rights to grow food without fear and intimidation assembled outside the courtroom today to support the farmers in their claims, recognizing that these injustices affect us all and that this case is deserving of the court’s time and attention.

We won't know the results of the hearing for a few weeks, but are taking a stand and are committed to seeing this through. 

Have a great afternoon!

Monsanto's Take on GMO Testing

A recent post in the Natural News highlights a claim made by Monsanto Corporation that "there is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans".  Despite many studies pointing to the dangers of GMO foods, Monsanto has taken the stance that GMOs are not substantially different from natural crops.  Here is a selection of text from the article that details a bit of Monsanto's argument:

In the "Why aren't you running human clinical trials on GM crops?" section of Monsanto's Food Safety page, the biotechnology giant explains its opinion that GMOs are "substantially equivalent" to natural organisms. According to Monsanto, since concentrations of proteins, carbohydrates, and other nutrient factors vary among natural crops, as well as among natural and GM crops, then these differences are unimportant in light of GMO safety.

Furthermore, Monsanto claims that its injection of foreign DNA into its GM crops is also safe because DNA is present in natural crops as well. Never mind that the injected DNA is foreign and unnatural, and is used to alter the entire genetic structure of GM crops -- according to Monsanto, its unnatural DNA is non-toxic because every other plant also has DNA.

It's time that we learn the truth about what's in our food, so that we can make more informed decisions as consumers about what goes into (and potentially harms) our bodies.  We are building a list of members interested in anti-GMO activism who can help send letters to the FDA or locally organize to advocate for state labeling regulation in which Rep. Roy and the Ledgelight Health District have led the way. Please e-mail Kristiane if you'd like to be added to the list as we coordinate more GMO activism activities.

Additionally, if you want to learn more about the Dangers of GMOs, register today for our Winter Conference!  With over 40 workshops, potluck lunch, vendors, live music, cooking demos, exhibits, expert panels, and a keynote by Jeffrey M. Smith, the leading spokesperson on the dangers of GMOs, this is an event you don't want to miss!

Have a great week!
-Melissa

Another Reason to Avoid GMOs: Bt Toxin Superpests

This is hardly breaking news, but worth remembering when deciding if you want to eat food processed with Bt corn or soy.  At the end of last year, both Grist and GM Freeze wrote articles about insects developing resistance to genetically modified Bt crops.  The following is an excerpt from GM Freeze:

Corn Rootworm

Scientists have confirmed five incidents of insects evolving resistance to Bt toxins in the field to date: Bt cotton in India (2010) and US (2008), moth pests in maize in Puerto Rico (2007) and South Africa (2007) and a beetle pest in maize in the US (2011).

Reasons for resistance developing are:

• Failure to provide adequate non-GM refuges in GM crops to ensure non-resistant adult insects can survive to breed with resistant ones so that the resistance gene does not become dominant. Refuges are required by US laws that are widely flouted.
• Levels of Bt toxin in the crops too low to deliver lethal doses to pests. Sub-lethal doses mean resistance can develop as pests survive, mate and pass on the resistance gene. If the number of resistant individuals is high they can multiply quite rapidly and become dominant.

This failure of Bt crops goes hand in hand with a separate superweed problem affecting Monsanto's Roundup Ready line of herbicide resistant crops. The moral of this story: genetic tinkering has a host of unintended consequences, some of which you can plan for (as in the case of non-GM refuges, which demonstrates another issue of whether or not companies will comply with knowledge-based regulations) and some of which you can't.  Since the yields of these crops are the same or worse than the organic alternative, why not just skip the GMOs altogether?

If you would like to know what's in your food, join our GMO Activist Project and add your voice to the public outcry to label genetically modified foods.  Check out our GMO resource page and take action at Just Label It.  If you want to learn more about the dangers of GMOs, register for our Winter Conference with keynote Jeffrey Smith, the leading spokesperson on the health dangers of genetically modified organisms.

Have a great rest of your week!
Melissa

January 31: A Citizen's Assembly of Support for Family Farmers vs. Monsanto

When: Tuesday, January 31, 2011 @ 9:00 am

Where: Southern District Court, New York City

Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse
500 Pearl St.
New York, NY 10007-1312

Here is a message from the lead plaintiffs in the Organic Seed Growers and Traders Association et. al v. Monsanto court case:

We wish to assemble free and peaceful citizens outside the Manhattan District court in an effort to present the important message to family farmers that millions of Americans stand behind them as they seek their day in court. In the past two decades, Monsanto’s seed monopoly has grown so powerful that they control the genetics of nearly 90% of five major commodity crops including corn, soybeans, cotton, canola and sugar beets. This has resulted in onerous costs to farmers through high technology patent fees for seeds as well as burdensome litigation costs in defending themselves against lawsuits asserted by Monsanto.

In many cases organic and conventional farmers are forced to stop growing certain crops in order to avoid genetic contamination and potential lawsuits. Between 1997 and April 2010, Monsanto filed 144 lawsuits against American farmers in at least 27 different states, for alleged infringement of its transgenic seed patents and/or breach of its license to those patents, while settling another 700 out of court for undisclosed amounts. As a result of these aggressive lawsuits, Monsanto has created an atmosphere of fear in rural America and driven dozens of farmers into bankruptcy.

The lawsuit OSGATA (Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association) et al vs. Monsanto was filed on behalf of 300,000 organic and non-GMO farmers and citizens to seek judicial relief in "protect[ing] themselves from ever being accused of infringing patents on transgenic (GMO) seed". The judge has requested and agreed to hear oral argument in orders to make a decision of whether or not to allow the farmers’ case to move forward in the courts after Monsanto filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. We are encouraging supporters of farmers’ rights to grow food without fear and intimidation to assemble outside the courtroom in a peaceful manner to support the farmers in their claims, recognizing that these injustices affect us all and that this case is deserving of the court’s time and attention.

Due to limited space, only a small number of individuals will be able to enter the courtroom and listen to the proceedings. We respectfully ask that farmers and plaintiffs in the case be given priority to hear this case in person as each plaintiff has traveled many miles and put a great deal on the line to be a part of this case.

In the spirit of peaceful assembly and respect for the courts, we request that you adhere to the following principles:

Principles for Citizens' Assembly

1.     Assemble outside the court in a show of support for family farmers and their right to grow food without the threat of intimidation, harassment or loss of income.
2.     Assemble peacefully to present a positive message that America’s citizens stand behind family farmers and support their rights of legal protection under the Constitution.
3.     Bring signs that portray messages of:

a.     Hope
b.     The positive impacts of sustainable and organic agriculture
c.     Solutions to our current crisis in food, agriculture and society
d.     Support for farmers who seek justice in the courts

4.     Be respectful of court security requests and follow them faithfully.
5.     Maintain a respectful distance from the court entry on Pearl Street, making sure not to block access for foot traffic or vehicles.
6.     Maintain a tone of respect for the court and the sanctity of our legal process as the judge hears the merits of this important case.
7.     Cell phones, cameras and tape recorders are prohibited inside the courthouse. Those who enter the courthouse must conform to court security protocols.
8.     No signs, t-shirts with slogans or other disruptions, visual or otherwise, are appropriate or allowed in the courtroom.
9.     No chanting or loud noises allowed outside the courthouse as all must maintain their conduct in ways that are respectful to the judicial process and in accordance with the seriousness of the case.
10.  Please follow the instructions of designated assembly captains who will continue to update you as the events of the day unfold.

As advocates for farmers and supporters of a citizen-based democracy we greatly appreciate your support for family farmers and your agreement to act in accordance with these principles in order to guarantee farmers' rights to grow food without fear and intimidation.

Location to Hear Plaintiffs and Attorney Comment After Hearing

Once oral arguments are heard in the court, farmers, plaintiffs and lead attorney Dan Ravicher of the Public Patent Foundation will be available for comments to supporters and the media, at the Southwest Corner on 500 Pearl Street, at Pearl Street and Cardinal Hayes Place.

For those planning on assembling at 9 am, Pearl Street has been recommended to gather respectfully and overflow can gather at Foley Square.

Link to Google Map http://bit.ly/NyDistrictCtPearlSt 

If link does not work, Google: 45 Cardinal Hayes Place, New York, NY for location of assembly, which is the intersection of Pearl Street and Cardinal Hayes Place.

Click here to RSVP to attend the Citizen's Assembly.

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/citizensassembly_monsanto/

Click Here to Sign Our Petition Supporting Farmers

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/farmersvs_monsanto/

One Great Reason to go Organic: GMOs

Right now the only way to know for sure if the food you're eating is GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) free is to buy organic.  Organic produce is prohibited from containing any genetically modified material, and organic livestock may not be given any genetically modified feed.  Maria Rodale, CEO and Chairman of Rodale, Inc., posted an article yesterday on the Huffington Post that describes the dangers of GMOs and the resulting need for product labeling.  Maria sites three studies listed in her article and summarizes them concisely: "One reports that GMOs survive in our bodies -- they aren't killed in the stomach, as some have suggested, but travel to the intestine where they remain active in the body. Another study reports that we are exposed to these GMOs, not only from the GMO foods themselves, but also from eating animals that eat GMO foods. And finally, animal studies reveal that these GMOs may be linked to disease.

So I say, Just Label It!"

The Just Label It campaign calls for mandatory labeling of GMO ingredients. The NOFA Interstate Council, NOFA RI, NOFA-VT, NOFA-NY and CT NOFA have joined the Campaign and are also plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Monsanto to protect organic producers from the ramifications of GMO contamination.  As part of our GMO Activist Program, we are building a list of members interested in anti-GMO activism who can help send letters to the FDA or locally organize to advocate for state labeling regulation in which Rep. Roy and the Ledgelight Health District have led the way. Please e-mail Kristiane if you'd like to be added to the list as we coordinate more GMO activism activities.

Check out our webpage to learn more about what you can do to ensure that you know what's in your food.

Have a great week!
-Melissa

10 Things You Should Know About GMOs

A new article by Care2 provides a concise and well-written outline of topics you can use in the event of a Genetically Modified Organism debate, courtesy of Jeffrey Smith, the Keynote speaker at our upcoming Winter Conference.  Advocates for GMO use have a lot to say about why GMOs are great for humanity, but numerous studies argue otherwise.  Here are some of the highlights:

1. GMOs are unhealthy.
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) urges doctors to prescribe non-GMO diets for all patients. They cite animal studies showing organ damage, gastrointestinal and immune system disorders, accelerated aging, and infertility. Human studies show how genetically modified (GM) food can leave material behind inside us, possibly causing long-term problems. Genes inserted into GM soy, for example, can transfer into the DNA of bacteria living inside us, and that the toxic insecticide produced by GM corn was found in the blood of pregnant women and their unborn fetuses.

3. GMOs increase herbicide use.
Most GM crops are engineered to be “herbicide tolerant”―they defy deadly weed killer. Monsanto, for example, sells Roundup Ready crops, designed to survive applications of their Roundup herbicide.
Between 1996 and 2008, US farmers sprayed an extra 383 million pounds of herbicide on GMOs. Overuse of Roundup results in “superweeds,” resistant to the herbicide. This is causing farmers to use even more toxic herbicides every year. Not only does this create environmental harm, GM foods contain higher residues of toxic herbicides. Roundup, for example, is linked with sterility, hormone disruption, birth defects, and cancer.

5. Government oversight is dangerously lax.
Most of the health and environmental risks of GMOs are ignored by governments’ superficial regulations and safety assessments. The reason for this tragedy is largely political. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), for example, doesn’t require a single safety study, does not mandate labeling of GMOs, and allows companies to put their GM foods onto the market without even notifying the agency. Their justification was the claim that they had no information showing that GM foods were substantially different. But this was a lie. Secret agency memos made public by a lawsuit show that the overwhelming consensus even among the FDA’s own scientists was that GMOs can create unpredictable, hard-to-detect side effects. They urged long-term safety studies. But the White House had instructed the FDA to promote biotechnology, and the agency official in charge of policy was Michael Taylor, Monsanto’s former attorney, later their vice president. He’s now the US Food Safety Czar.

8. GMOs harm the environment.
GM crops and their associated herbicides can harm birds, insects, amphibians, marine ecosystems, and soil organisms. They reduce bio-diversity, pollute water resources, and are unsustainable. For example, GM crops are eliminating habitat for monarch butterflies, whose populations are down 50% in the US. Roundup herbicide has been shown to cause birth defects in amphibians, embryonic deaths and endocrine disruptions, and organ damage in animals even at very low doses. GM canola has been found growing wild in North Dakota and California, threatening to pass on its herbicide tolerant genes on to weeds.

9. GMOs do not increase yields, and work against feeding a hungry world.
Whereas sustainable non-GMO agricultural methods used in developing countries have conclusively resulted in yield increases of 79% and higher, GMOs do not, on average, increase yields at all. This was evident in the Union of Concerned Scientists’ 2009 report Failure to Yield―the definitive study to date on GM crops and yield.

And that's only half of the list!  To read the full list, go here.  If you want to hear Jeffrey Smith speak in person about the dangers of GMOs, register for our Winter Conference being held on March 3, 2012 in Manchester, CT.  To learn more and to register, click here.

Have a great afternoon!
-Melissa

GM Crops Have not Delivered on Promised Benefits

A new report by 20 Indian, south-east Asian, African and Latin American food and conservation groups, representing millions of people, shows that Genetic engineering has failed to increase the yield of any food crop but has vastly increased the use of chemicals and the growth of "superweeds".  According to a video posted by the UK Guardian, in an article about the Global Citizen's Report on the State of GMOs, the only entity that GMOs actually benefit is the biotech industry.  GM crops were originally marketed as a solution to world hunger, climate change, and soil erosion, but have only proven thus far to exacerbate those problems.  Not only have GM crops failed to provide benefits like drought resistance and salt tolerance like originally proposed, but they have also contributed to the increased used of synthetic chemicals to control pests and weeds.  Ironically, biotech companies had originally justified that these same crops would ultimately decrease global dependence on pesticides.

The Guardian sites two examples of GM crops' failures globally: "In China, where insect-resistant Bt cotton is widely planted, populations of pests that previously posed only minor problems have increased 12-fold since 1997. A 2008 study in the International Journal of Biotechnology found that any benefits of planting Bt cotton have been eroded by the increasing use of pesticides needed to combat them.  Additionally, soya growers in Argentina and Brazil have been found to use twice as much herbicide on their GM as they do on conventional crops, and a survey by Navdanya International, in India, showed that pesticide use increased 13-fold since Bt cotton was introduced."

Biotech companies were able to successfully market their GM crops to farmers through a combination of heavy government lobbying, buying up local seed companies, and removing conventional seed from the market.  As a result, the three largest GM companies own 70% of the global seed market.  Through patenting and intellectual property laws, these companies can legally own and sell their seed for a premium price.  As Vandana Shiva, director of the Indian organisation Navdanya International, which co-ordinated the report, so eloquently put it, "Choice is being undermined as food systems are increasingly controlled by giant corporations and as chemical and genetic pollution spread. GM companies have put a noose round the neck of farmers. They are destroying alternatives in the pursuit of profit."

To read the full Guardian article, and to watch a video on the subject, check here.  To visit Navdanya International, check here.

The Spread of Roundup Resistant Superweeds

Monsanto's Roundup Ready Soybean Seeds

An article in the Canadian CBC News Friday discussed a growing problem in the United States and Canada - the increasing prevalence of Roundup resistant weed strains, or superweeds.  The plants develop in response to the widespread use of Monsanto's Roundup herbicide.  Through natural selection, a strain develops that's resistant to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, and as other less resistant strains of the weed are killed off by the herbicide, the superweed takes over.  These weeds can double or triple the costs of weed control and lead to more tillage, more erosion, more water pollution from run-off, increased costs, yield losses and higher food prices.  Some proponents of industrial agriculture point to using other chemicals as the best solution for the problem, arguing that the best way to stay ahead of the resistance curve is to develop new genetically modified crops that are resistant to chemicals other than glyphosate.  Thus, farmers could then spray their fields with a new chemical, killing the superweeds.  The problem with this view, however, is that we then become increasingly dependent on chemicals to produce our crops, and the superweeds become ever stronger as the quality of our food and soil becomes ever weaker.

Chris Willenborg, a weed scientist at the University of Saskatchewan, cautioned, "The solution is not always more and different pesticides."  He suggested using additional methods such as crop rotation and high seeding rates to keep weed populations low and minimize the chance that they become resistant to Roundup.  Natural and organic farming methods are also a way to solve the problem of superweeds without the use of potentially dangerous chemicals and the inevitable weakening of farmland that those chemicals cause.  Switching over from Roundup Ready seed to seed that hasn't been genetically modified, when combined with green methods of crop production, is a way to stay ahead of the so-called resistance curve in a technologically advanced way without having to utilize the chemicals so often associated with "technologically advanced" or "modern" farming.

Check out CBC's article here.

GMO's Threat to Organic Agriculture

The following article was written by a Massachusetts organic farmer, Ed Stockman, for NOFA Massachusetts.  This article demonstrates the dangers of genetically modified organism crops and seeds to organic agriculture, the environment and human health.  This issue is too important to be ignored, which is reflected by CT NOFA's participation in the lawsuit against Monsanto.  While organic farming is facing more regulation, GMO crops are being deregulated. Every person is a stakeholder as a food producer or as a consumer and every individual should be concerned and involved.

Will organic crops and food be contaminated out of existence?

By Ed Stockman

  

The recent deregulation of genetically engineered alfalfa, sugar beets and ethanol corn by the USDA certainly was a blow to organic agriculture and eventually to all organic foods. Those of us who wish to eat organic foods uncontaminated by genetically engineered DNA will have a real problem finding such foods in the near future. Growing your own non-GMO foods may no longer be an option because our seed supply will also be contaminated. The USDA owns the word “organic” and they set the final rules. This is the same agency that is deregulating one GMO crop after another so they can be grown in the open to contaminate organic and non-GMO crops. The USDA refuses to test, regulate or label GMO crops so it’s reasonable to think they may redefine the word organic to allow contaminated crops and seeds to be sold as “some kind of organic” in the future. 

        Little hope remains that either the Democrats or the Republicans will stop the USDA and the advancement of GMOs in agriculture and our food. The mounting evidence connecting genetic engineering to health, environmental and agricultural dangers paints the future for healthy organic food and pure, uncontaminated seeds in shades of grey, making the GMO problem seem insurmountable — but it is not! Defeating biotech will not be easy, but it is possible. We should not forget the power at the top always depends on the silence of the people on the bottom.

Let’s not be silent

A 2011 MSNBC poll found 96 percent of voters want GMO foods labeled. Others polls found 53 percent would not eat a product if they knew the product contained GMOs. But don’t expect labeling anytime soon. Food corporations and manufacturers are fearful of labeling because GMO labeling means lost sales and reduced revenues. Losing money gets their attention, so let’s help them lose money. How?  First, we need to STOP BUYING AND EATING GMO PRODUCTS or products with GMO ingredients. But how do I know if a product contains GMO ingredients if they are not labeled? Essentially, they are labeled. If a product contains non-organic corn or soy or ingredients derived from soy or corn then more than likely the product contains GMOs. The best way to find out is to print a copy of the free Non-GMO Shopping Guide at NONgmoShoppingGuide.com. It contains a list of invisible GM ingredients.

Secondly, we need to organize, to form local groups and educate ourselves. Showing a film like “The World According To Monsanto” and signing up the audience is an effective way of forming a group. Educate yourself and talk to your friends, neighbors and store managers. Don’t think health food stores are safe havens from GMOs. Read the labels, don’t buy those that contain ingredients derived from GMOs and tell store managers why you are not buying a certain product. Vote for a GMO-free world with your dollars and your purchases. If you want help forming a local working group contact me at edstockman@verizon.net.

Thirdly, let’s use the power of the Internet and consumerism. How do we get food corporations to stop using GMO ingredients? We impact their bottom lines by not buying their products and letting them know why. E-mail, phone or write manufacturers and ask about the ingredients in their products. Tell them you like their products but are very concerned about GMOs and will no longer buy or eat products with GMO ingredients.

We don’t need every person in America to stop buying GMO products, so there is no need to try and convince resistant people. We just need enough to cut into corporate profits and create a “tipping point”. It is surprisingly low. That’s what happened in Europe to stop GMO foods and more recently with rBGH in milk in the U.S. The word is out – GMOs are unsafe – and once the tipping point is reached, the demand for GMO crops and seeds will be significantly reduced and fields will once again grow non-GMO crops.

I’ve been an organic grower for 40 years, all my adult life, and I’m fearful it may all end. I can’t predict the future, but one thing is for sure: if we remain silent, the power at the top will allow organic crops and food to be contaminated with GMO genetics. Let’s not be silent.

Ed Stockman is an organic farmer, biologist and former NOFA/Mass Organic Extension Educator. He farms in Western Massachusetts and is a spokesperson for the Hilltown Non-GMO Working Group. He can be reached at edstockman@verizon.net.