EU Commission plans organic farming review

EU Commission plans organic farming review

European rules on organic certification and the potential risks posed by genetically-modified crops are to be reconsidered as part of an EU Commission review.

The commission is due to start work on an organic roadmap in September, which could pave the way for an update of the EU's regulations on organic farming, which were agreed in 2007.

The roadmap is expected to look at several policy areas, including enforcement and monitoring of organic foods certification and labeling, as well as setting international standards on organic production in trade matters.

The review is also likely to look at the effect of genetically-modified seeds on organic production, with particular focus on cross-fertilisation of GM and non-GM crops.

The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements welcomed the upcoming roadmap as a potential to strengthen the sector.

"The commission's review of the legislative policy and framework for organic food and farming provides the opportunity to build on the success of the organic sector," Christopher Stopes, IFOAM EU president, told the European Organic Congress in Lithuania.

"These must shape the development of the organic regulation in a way that enables expansion - more land organically farmed, more organic food eaten by all European citizens.

"This bold ambition depends on innovation and well-informed development. A new organic action plan can lay the foundations for this while the new CAP is implemented and new legislative proposals for organic regulation are made." FWI

WSU study finds no more GMO wheat in NW

USA

WSU study finds no more GMO wheat in NW

 A study by Washington State University has found no additional sign of the genetically modified wheat discovered at one Oregon farm this spring.

The tests involved dozens of wheat varieties developed at Washington State, the University of Idaho and Oregon State University, plus varieties from Westbred/Monsanto and Limagrain Cereal Seeds, WSU said this week.

The time-consuming study included checking more than 20,000 individual plots, Washington State University said.

"WSU undertook its own investigation as part of its commitment to serving Northwest farmers," said James Moyer, director of WSU's Agricultural Research Center.

The study's collaboration with the other universities and the commercial seed companies was unprecedented, and reflected the common goal of trying to determine if the genetically modified wheat discovered in Oregon was an isolated case or if the industry had a larger problem, Moyer said.

WSU's data clearly suggests it was an isolated case, he said.

The tests involved growing seed, spraying infant plants with the herbicide glyphosate, and conducting molecular testing. None of the plants showed the glyphosate resistance found in the fields of an as-yet-unnamed Oregon farmer, WSU said.

Last month, the U.S. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service also said grain tests and interviews with several hundred farmers found no other instances of herbicide-resistant crops beyond that one Oregon farm.

The modified wheat was discovered in May when field workers at an Eastern Oregon farm were clearing acres for the bare offseason and came across a patch of wheat that didn't belong. The workers sprayed it, but the wheat wouldn't die, so the farmer sent a sample to Oregon State University to test.

A few weeks later, Oregon State wheat scientists discovered that the wheat was genetically modified. They contacted the USDA, which ran more tests and confirmed the discovery.

Agriculture Department officials have said the modified wheat discovered in the Oregon field is the same strain as a genetically modified wheat that was designed to be herbicide-resistant and was legally tested by seed giant Monsanto a decade ago but never approved.

Most of the corn and soybeans grown in the United States are already modified, or genetically altered to include certain traits, often resistance to herbicides or pesticides.

But the country's wheat crop is not, as many wheat farmers have shown reluctance to use genetically engineered seeds since their product is usually consumed directly. Much of the corn and soybean crop is used as feed.

The USDA has said the wheat would be safe to eat if consumed. But American consumers, like many consumers in Europe and Asia, have shown an increasing interest in avoiding genetically modified foods.

The vast majority of Washington's wheat is exported. MAILTRIBUNE

Most of Africa ‘not positive’ about growing GM crops

Most of Africa ‘not positive’ about growing genetically modified crops

WHILE South Africa has long grown genetically modified (GM) crops, resistance from across most of the continent is set to slow global plans to turn Africa into the world’s breadbasket.

Just four countries on the continent — South Africa, Egypt, Burkina Faso and Sudan — allow GM crops to be grown commercially. As recently as 2008, South Africa was the only African country to commercially cultivate GM crops such as maize, soya beans and cotton.

In that year Egypt joined in, with a limited amount of GM maize cultivated. Burkina Faso allowed GM cotton to be grown and last year Sudan followed in cultivating the non food crop.

Most of the unused land available for farming is in Africa, casting the continent in the role of " saviour" for a world which has to double food production by 2050 to feed a population projected to grow to more than 9-billion.

South Africa grows about 3-million hectares of GM crops. The areas planted in the other three African countries are negligible. However, there are signs that the situation might change. Cameroon, Kenya, Malawi, Ghana and Uganda have approved confined trials of GM crops, and Nigeria has a bill to relax laws about GM crops awaiting approval.

Jannie de Villiers, chairman of grain producers’ body Grain SA, said last week GM food is an integral part of South Africa’s food security policy. "The rest of Africa is not positive about growing GM food, though they don’t mind eating it. The problem is that the calculated potential of the area that is available for maize growing in Africa is based on higher-yielding GM crops."

Multinational DuPont Pioneer, which last week completed the acquisition of 80% of South African seed company Pannar, makes no secret of its views on Africa as a future world breadbasket. However, it denies it is lobbying African governments to change their policies on GM crops.

Vice-president Dan Jacobi said the company "works to partner with African governments to develop open, consistent science-based regulatory systems that allow cross-border shipping of high-quality hybrid seed".

He insisted that the company is "comfortable" with African resistance to GM crops, though he added that it means "farmers can double, triple or quadruple their yields".

"We advise farmers but do not dictate to them," Mr Jacobi said. "We think GM is one tool in the toolbox." The company’s R62m technology hub network centred in Delmas would make a big difference in providing "stress-tolerant hybrid" seeds to the market.

Political and economic pressures play a big role in maintaining the status quo in Africa regarding GM crops.

Chance Kabaye, director of Zambia’s Indaba Agricultural Policy Research Institute and a former agriculture minister, recalled former president Levy Mwanawasa saying GM would be allowed in Zambia "over my dead body". Mr Kabaye told the Bureau for Food and Agricultural Policy in Pretoria that Mr Mwanawasa "was uncertain about it at the time and made what he regarded as a popular statement.

"But, anyway, he is dead now….." Mr Mwanawasa died in 2008.

The biggest hurdle for African countries to negotiate in the GM question is possible sanctions from their biggest agricultural export market, the European Union (EU).

The EU has clashed with the US — the world’s biggest producer of GM food — in world trade forums over GM food, although it seems the emphasis of the trading bloc’s objections has now shifted from safety concerns to political and economic arguments.

With no evidence of health problems arising from GM, opponents say accepting GM crops concentrates power in seed companies that develop and market them. Spokesmen for the biggest such company, Monsanto, argue that their products improve yields while using fewer resources to produce. BDLIVE