To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Farmers Fight to Save Organic Crops Farmers Fight to Save Organic Crops by Ben Lilliston Progressive, Sept, 2001 http://www.progressive.org/0901/lil0901.html edited For the last four years, Nebraska organic farmer David Vetter has been testing his corn for a new kind of pollution. Situated right in the middle of corn country, all around him are farmers growing genetically modified corn. And that poses a problem. Corn is an open-pollinating crop. Wind and insects can carry pollen from a few yards to several miles. Last year, Vetter's organic corn tested positive for genetic contamination. Organic farmers are having an increasingly difficult time preventing genetically modified organisms from migrating into their fields. Genetic contamination can (also) come through the sharing of equipment like combines, elevators, or trucks. The costs associated with trying to keep organic separated from genetically modified seed are mounting. "A real issue at the moment for organic farmers is the increased cost associated with testing," says Bob Scowcroft, with the Organic Farm Research Foundation. Organic is the fastest expanding sector of the domestic food business--growing a whopping 20 percent every year since 1990. Organic farmers are fighting back. Many family farm groups throughout the country are interested in pushing for legislation that would clearly identify the seed maker, rather than the farmer, as liable for contamination. Politicians have introduced bills in the U.S. Congress and more than a dozen states that would require labeling of genetically modified foods and stronger pre-market safety testing requirements. Some of the bills would assign liability to seed companies for damages. The Maine legislature passed a bill in May that would require manufacturers or seed dealers of genetically engineered plants, plant parts, or seeds to provide written instructions to all growers on how to plant, grow, and harvest the crops to minimize potential cross-contamination. The Maine bill is the first of its kind in the country. But the future integrity of organic products may well be decided in the courtroom. There is no case law related to genetically altered crops, and no laws have passed (although several have been introduced at themstate and federal level) assigning liability. In the past, U.S. courts have ruled against pesticide companies for pesticide drift. Farmers hope they would do the same for genetic drift. A class action lawsuit filed by farmers who did not grow StarLink seeks compensation for lost export markets associated with the scandal. The lawsuit, filed last December, alleges that StarLink's manufacturer, Aventis, failed to follow the EPA registration for StarLink corn and neglected to take other precautions to prevent StarLink corn from entering the human food supply chain. As a result, the suit claims, there has been widespread contamination of the U.S. corn crop with StarLink, which has in turn resulted in a loss of export and domestic markets for U.S. corn and a depression in U.S. corn prices. The suit, filed in Illinois, seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive relief requiring Aventis to decontaminate all soil, farming equipment, storage equipment, harvest equipment, transportation facilities, grain elevators, and non-StarLink seed supplies to prevent further contamination. Another lawsuit, this one against Monsanto, charges, among other things, that the company failed to test genetically modified seeds and crops adequately before releasing them into the food supply. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of farmers by the Washington, D.C., law firm Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld, & Toll, also charges that Monsanto, together with other companies, formed a global cartel to fix prices on genetically modified seeds and conspired to restrain trade in the GMO corn and soybean market. "If U.S. courts allowed biotech companies to sue organic farmers for selling their contaminated crops, organic farmers could be found liable to pay damages to the contaminating companies. In essence, this would amount to requiring organic farmers to pay for the nuisance caused by these biotech companies," wrote San Francisco attorneys Robert Uram and Giselle Vigneron in a recent analysis of the case. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To get off the CONS-SPST-BIOTECH-FORUM list, send any message to: [log in to unmask] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to: [log in to unmask]