FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 22, 2009
Contact:
Paul Achitoff, Earthjustice, 808-599-2436
Andrew Kimbrell, Center for Food Safety, 703-927-2826
Zelig Golden, Center for Food Safety, 415-826-2770
John Bianchi, Goodman Media, 212-576-2700
Matthew Dillon, Organic Seed Alliance, 360-385-7192
Tom Stearns, High Mowing Seeds, 802-472-6174
Neil Carman, Sierra Club, 512-288-5772

COURT FINDS USDA VIOLATED FEDERAL LAW BY ALLOWING GENETICALLY
ENGINEERED SUGAR BEETS ON THE MARKET

Government Failed To Evaluate Environmental and Economic Risks of
Monsanto Product

San Francisco, CA - In a case brought by Center for Food Safety and
Earthjustice representing a coalition of farmers and consumers, a
Federal Court ruled yesterday that the Bush USDA’s approval of
genetically engineered (GE) “RoundUp Ready” sugar beets was unlawful.
The Court ordered the USDA to conduct a rigorous assessment of the
environmental and economic impacts of the crop on farmers and the
environment.

The federal district court for the Northern District of California
ruled that the U. S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (“APHIS”) violated the National
Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) when it failed to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) before deregulating sugar beets
that have been genetically engineered (“GE”) to be resistant to
glyphosate herbicide, marketed by Monsanto as Roundup. Plaintiffs
Center for Food Safety, Organic Seed Alliance, Sierra Club, and High
Mowing Seeds, represented by Earthjustice and the Center for Food
Safety, filed suit against APHIS in January 2008, alleging APHIS
failed to adequately assess the environmental, health, and associated
economic impacts of allowing “Roundup Ready” sugar beets to be
commercially grown without restriction.

“This court decision is a wakeup call for the Obama USDA that they
will not be allowed to ignore the biological pollution and economic
impacts of gene altered crops,” stated Andrew Kimbrell Executive
Director of the Center for Food Safety. “The Courts have made it clear
that USDA’s job is to protect America’s farmers and consumers, not the
interests of Monsanto.”

While industry asserts that the adoption rates of GE sugar beets has
been high, food producers have shown reluctance in accepting GE beet
sugar. Over 100 companies have joined the Non-GM Beet Sugar Registry
opposing the introduction of GE sugar beets, and pledging to seek
wherever possible to avoid using GM beet sugar in their products:
<http://www.seedsofdeception.com/includes/services/nongm_sugar_beet_registry_display.cfm>http://www.seedsofdeception.com/includes/services/nongm_sugar_beet_registry_display.cfm
.

Sugar beet seed is grown primarily in Oregon’s Willamette Valley,
which is also an important seed growing area for crops closely related
to sugar beets, such as organic chard and table beets. GE sugar beets
are wind pollinated and will inevitably cross-pollinate the related
crops being grown in the same area. Such biological contamination
would be devastating to organic farmers, who face debilitating market
losses if their crops are contaminated by a GE variety. Contamination
also reduces the ability of conventional farmers to decide what to
grow, and limits consumer choice of the foods they can eat. In his
September 21, 2009 order requiring APHIS to prepare an EIS, Judge
Jeffrey S. White emphasized that “the potential elimination of a
farmer’s choice to grow non-genetically engineered crops, or a
consumer's choice to eat non-genetically engineered food, is an action
that potentially eliminates or reduces the availability of a
particular plant has a significant effect on the human environment.”

The Court found “no support in the record” for APHIS’ conclusion that
conventional sugar beets would remain available for farmers and
consumers and held that the agency’s decision that there would be no
impacts from the GE beets “unreasonable.”

The Court also held that APHIS failed to analyze the impacts of
biological contamination on the related crops of red table beets and
Swiss chard. “Organic seed is the foundation of organic farming and
organic food integrity, said Mathew Dillon, Director of Advocacy of
the Organic Seed Alliance. “We must continue to protect this natural
resource, along with the rights of organic farmers to be protected
from negative economic impact from GE crops, and consumers rights' to
choose to eat food free of GE components.”

“The ruling is a major consumer victory for preserving the right to
grow and eat organic foods in the United States,” stated Neil Carman
of the Sierra Club. “Environmental impacts of Roundup Ready sugar
beets were also not considered by APHIS, and they need to be fully
evaluated.”

“Roundup Ready” crops allow farmers to douse their fields with
Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide without killing the crop. Constant
application of the herbicide has resulted in weeds becoming resistant
to it. There are now millions of acres across the U.S. of such
“superweeds,” including marestail, ragweed, and waterhemp, and farmers
are using greater applications of Roundup or other, even more toxic
chemicals. According to an independent analysis of USDA data by
former Board of Agriculture Chair of the National Academy of Sciences,
Dr. Charles Benbrook, GE crops increased herbicide use in the U.S. by
122 million pounds – a 15-fold increase – between 1994 (when GE
herbicide-tolerant crops were introduced) to 2004.

Earthjustice attorney Paul Achitoff noted, “Although touted by
Monsanto as offering all sorts of benefits, GE crops offer consumers
nothing, and are designed primarily to sell herbicides. The end
result of their use is more toxics in our environment and our food,
disappointed farmers, and revenue for Monsanto.”

A 2008 scientific study revealed that Roundup formulations and
metabolic products cause the death of human embryonic, placental, and
umbilical cells in vitro even at low concentrations. Other recent
studies suggest Roundup is an endocrine disrupter, and that some
amphibians and other organisms may be at risk from glyphosate.

In addition, Judge Jeffrey S. White – in his ruling – has scheduled a
meeting in his courtroom on October 30, 2009 to discuss the remedies
phase of the case, including potential injunctive relief.

Monsanto has been the subject of increasing speculation that the
Department of Justice’s antitrust division is scrutinizing the
biotechnology company’s control of the markets for GE crops, and for
commodities such as corn, soy and cotton.

The case is Center for Food Safety v. Vilsack, No. C 08-00484 JSW
(N.D. Cal. 2009). The decision follows on the heels of a June 2009
decision from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the
illegality of the APHIS’ approval of Monsanto’s genetically engineered
alfalfa.

***

_______________________________________________

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp