Un informe de Estados Unidos confirma que los cultivos transgénicos ponen en peligro la agricultura ecológica

Categories

Food

 Organizaciones sociales piden a la nueva Ministra un cambio de rumbo urgente en la política española sobre transgénicos 

Bruselas, Madrid – Una encuesta realizada a agricultores ecológicos de EEUU demuestra el fracaso de la denominada “coexistencia” entre los cultivos transgénicos y los ecológicos o convencionales [1]. La experiencia en EEUU muestra que la prevención de riesgos y los efectos de la contaminación por transgénicos plantean una desventaja injusta para el resto de productores, y supone una clara advertencia para España, único país de la UE que permite el cultivo de transgénicos a gran escala. Organizaciones sociales solicitan a la nueva Ministra de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente, Isabel García Tejerina, que España se alinee con la mayoría de países europeos que rechazan el cultivo de transgénicos.

“La situación en EE.UU. debería servir de ejemplo para que España no incida en los mismos errores. La idea de “coexistencia” que nos quiere vender la industria es simplemente imposible, como se puede comprobar en ambos países. La introducción de cultivos transgénicos perjudica a quienes apuestan por una agricultura más sostenible, y va en contra de la voluntad de una amplia mayoría de la ciudadanía europea” afirmó David Sánchez, coordinador de campañas de Food & Water Europe.

La encuesta, realizada en EEUU por las organizaciones Food & Water Watch y OFARM [2] y publicada hoy en Europa, revela los costes extra a los que se ven sometidos los agricultores ecológicos. Estos costes se deben a la carga de trabajo adicional, al coste económico y el tiempo que conllevan las medidas preventivas para evitar la contaminación transgénica y de las consecuencias cuando ésta se produce. Las encuesta muestra que:

  • Las perdidas económicas de las medidas preventivas a las que están obligados los agricultores ecológicos en EEUU pueden llegar a suponer más de 6.000 euros anuales, entre zonas de barrera, retraso en la siembra, análisis y otras medidas.  
  • Un tercio de los encuestados había sufrido contaminación en su cosecha, con una pérdida media de más de 3.000 euros anuales por pérdida del valor añadido, búsqueda de otro comprador y transporte. De ellos, la mitad habían visto su cosecha rechazada varias veces.
  • Otras consecuencias incluyen abandono de cultivos en los que hay aprobadas variedades transgénicas, o tensión con los vecinos que cultivan estas variedades.

“Agricultores y agricultoras del Estado Español se enfrentan a los mismos problemas. La misma situación de inseguridad y desprotección, con tan solo un cultivo transgénico autorizado, el maíz MON810. La aplicación de las medidas de protección y el coste de las mismas no debe recaer en los productores que han elegido no cultivar transgénicos. Además éstos cultivos no deben condicionar al resto de los productores que han optado por el modelo de agricultura social y familiar europeo“ añadió Andoni García, miembro de la ejecutiva de la Coordinadora de Organizaciones de Agricultores y Ganaderos (COAG).

La ganadería ecológica en el Estado Español ya está también seriamente afectada por la presencia de transgénicos, ya que los operadores tienen que asumir importantes sobrecostes para garantizar la alimentación sin transgénicos de sus animales, debido a los numerosos casos de contaminación de piensos y cultivos. [3]

En vista de la situación de la producción ecológica y convencional en EEUU que muestra el informe, COAG, Ecologistas en Acción, Amigos de la Tierra y Food & Water Europe exigen a la nueva ministra de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente un giro de 180 grados en la política sobre transgénicos de su Ministerio.

“La agricultura y la ganadería ecológica son  sectores en constante crecimiento que generan empleo y dinamizan el medio rural. Y para no lastrar a estos sectores necesitamos prohibir de forma inmediata el cultivo en España del maíz MON810. No podemos permitir que el Estado Español siga siendo la puerta de entrada de los cultivos transgénicos en Europa” aseguró Gabriela Vázquez, portavoz de Ecologistas en Acción.

In English

Para más información

David Sánchez, coordinador de campañas, Food & Water Europe [email protected] +32 485842604

Andoni García Arriola, miembro de la ejecutiva de COAG, tlf: 636 451 569

Gabriela Vázquez, portavoz, Ecologistas en Acción, 635 170495

Blanca G. Ruibal, responsable de Agricultura y Alimentación, Amigos de la Tierra 691471389

Notas

[1] El informe resumen de la encuesta “Los agricultores ecológicos pagan el precio de la contaminación por transgénicos” se puede encontrar en este enlace

http://www.foodandwatereurope.org/briefs/contaminacion-por-transgenicos/

[2] Food & Water Europe es el proyecto europeo de la organización Food & Water Watch, una asociación de personas consumidoras con sede en EE.UU. que trabaja para garantizar que la comida, el agua y el pescado que consumimos es seguro, accesible y sostenible. www.foodandwatereurope.org

OFARM (Organic Farmer’s Agency for Relationship Marketing) coordina los esfuerzos de comercialización de cooperativas de productores para beneficiar y mantener la agricultura ecológica en EE.UU. www.ofarm.coop

[3] Implicaciones socioeconómicas de la introducción de OMGs en el mercado https://www.ecologistasenaccion.org/IMG/pdf_Informe_implicaciones_socioeconomicas_transgenicos.pdf

Alliance Calls for Halt to GM Crops in Spain: GM Contamination Threatens Non-GM Farming in Europe

Categories

Food

En Espagnol

Brussels and Madrid – While European decision makers argue over approving new genetically modified (GM) crops, a Spanish alliance of farmers and environmentalists led by Food & Water Europe demanded radical change in the European Union’s GM cultivation policy. The alliance says the results of a survey of organic farmers in the U.S. shows widespread GM contamination, proving that GM “coexistence” has failed and that the resulting costs and extra work are carried by non-GM farmers. [1] This is a clear warning for Spain, the only EU country growing GM crops on a large scale and where there are likely to be more GM crops soon if approvals in the pipeline for new GM maize varieties come through.

“The situation in the U.S. should be a clear warning for Spain and the rest of the EU not to make the same mistakes,” said David Sánchez, campaign officer at Food & Water Europe. “So-called ‘coexistence’ as promoted by the GM industry is simply impossible, as farmers in both the U.S. and Spain already know.”

The survey, published first in the U.S. by Food & Water Watch and the Organic Farmers’ Agency for Relationship Marketing [2] and released today in Europe, documents the added burden organic and non-GM farmers face, including the increased costs of trying to prevent contamination, extra labour, longer hours and financial insecurity due to economic losses when contamination occurs. The survey shows: 

  • Economic costs of preventive measures to avoid GMOs can reach more than €6,119 (US$8,500) per year, including buffer zones, delaying planting and testing among others.
  • One out of three responding farmers have dealt with GMO contamination in their farm. They reported a median cost of €3,240 (US$4,500). Of those contaminated farmers, over half have had crops rejected by their buyers.
  • Other consequences include abandoning crops with GM varieties approved or strained relations between neighbours.

“Farmers in Spain are already facing the same insecurity and lack of legal protection as U.S. colleagues, even though there is only one GM crop approved in the EU. Preventive measures and their costs should not be carried by the farmers that chose not to grow GMOs,” said Andoni García, member of the board of the Spanish Coordination of Farmers (COAG).

The Spanish organic cattle industry is also seriously affected by GM contamination. Forced to import maize from other countries that do not grow GM crops, farmers need to pay extra costs to guarantee GM-free feed. [3]

Considering the situation in the U.S., the COAG, Ecologistas en Acción, Friends of the Earth Spain and Food & Water Europe demand European authorities, including the Spanish Government, reverse current GMO crop policy.

“Organic farming is a growing sector that creates employment and puts new energies in rural areas. Protecting its development means we urgently need to stop growing GM crops in Spain. We cannot be the back door for GM crops into Europe any longer,” added Blanca G. Ruibal, food and farming campaigner at Friends of the Earth Spain. 

For more information:

David Sánchez, Campaign Officer, Food & Water Europe +32 485842604

Andoni García Arriola, member of the board of COAG, +34 636 451 569

Blanca G. Ruibal, Food Campaigner, Friends of the Earth Spain, +34 691471389

Gabriela Vázquez, spokesperson, Ecologistas en Acción, +34 635 170495

Notes 

[1] The report “Organic Farmers Pay the Price for GMO Contamination “ (“Los agricultores ecológicos pagan el precio de la contaminación por transgénicos”) can be downloaded in Spanish and English.

[2] Food & Water Europe is the European program of Food & Water Watch, a nonprofit consumer organization based in the United States that works to ensure the food, water and fish we consume is safe, accessible and sustainable. So we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of where their food comes from, keep clean, affordable, public tap water flowing freely to our homes, protect the environmental quality of oceans, force government to do its job protecting citizens, and educate about the importance of keeping shared resources under public control. http://www.foodandwatereurope.org/europe/

Organic Farmers’ Agency for Relationship Marketing is a cooperative incorporated in the State of Minnesota as a marketing-agency-in-common to support organic producer and their group marketing efforts through cooperatives and farmer association. Current efforts include organic grain, livestock and dairy. Member associations/cooperatives have organic producer members in 18 states from Montana to Texas to Tennessee to Ohio and Michigan and all states in between. www.ofarm.coop

[3] Questionnaire about the socio-economic implications of the placing on the market of GMOs for cultivation. A diagnosis by Spanish organizations: COAG, Ecologistas en Acción, Friends of the Earth Spain, Greenpeace and CECU

www.eurovia.org/IMG/doc/COAG_Socio-Economic_Report_EN-2.doc

UK GM Report: Vested Interests Miss the Point

Categories

Food

Statement from Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter

Brussels—“Food & Water Europe dismissed today’s United Kingdom report calling for more GM trials in the UK as “a chronically flawed effort from blinkered vested interests. The UK’s pro-GM government asked a group of GM scientists and lobbyists what we should do about GM food and crops. Since many of the scientists involved make money from GM, it’s no surprise they want more of it. But this situation begs the question: shouldn’t those advising the Government on GM be a bit more independent, or at least a little more distant from the profits?

“The report  aims for a shift to U.S.-style regulation based on “substantial equivalence,” rather than the EU’s clear case-by-case precautionary evaluation of each GMO in turn. This attempt to portray GMOs as “just the same” also undermines the very labels that help EU consumers find, and roundly reject, GM products on supermarket shelves.

“The biggest problem with the report is that it misses the point—if industrial food production was going to end hunger, it would have done so by now. We need a much smarter approach to feeding ourselves, with more respect for what farmers do, a sentiment that was reflected in a report called Wake Up Before It’s Too Late, which the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development issued last year.

UK Government Pressed on Pro-GM Position

Categories

Food

Brussels – Food & Water Europe today asked the UK Government to change its vocal but ill-founded pro-GM position in light of the evidence that GM and non-GM farming are incompatible. 

EU Food Policy Analyst Eve Mitchell said, “The UK Government keeps saying it will base its GM policy on evidence and that it will listen to public views, so we’re asking how it is addressing the evidence that doesn’t suit its pro-GM agenda.”

Food & Water Europe is particularly keen to hear how UK Government support for GM cultivation protects the rights of farmers and consumers who want to avoid GMOs. A new survey of farmers conducted by Washington DC-based Food & Water Watch and the Organic Farmers’ Agency for Relationship Marketing across 17 U.S. states reveals that since GM cultivation was introduced in 1996, GM contamination has unfairly burdened organic and non-GMO farmers with extra work, longer hours and financial insecurity, while those growing GM crops are not required to mitigate the risk of contamination. Survey results show GM and non-GM coexistence is a practical impossibility in the small fields of the EU and UK. Even in the huge agricultural holdings farmed in the U.S.:

  • 52 percent of survey respondents have had shipments rejected due to GM contamination at a median cost of US$4,500 due to this load rejection — one farmer reported a US$367,000 loss in one year. Five out of six responding farmers are concerned about GMO contamination impacting their farm, with 60 percent saying they are extremely concerned.
  • Over two-thirds of respondents do not think good stewardship alone is enough to protect organic and non-GMO farmers from contamination.
  • Nearly half of respondents are skeptical that GM and non-GM crop production can coexist.

In addition, Food & Water Europe asked the UK Government to explain how it will develop the necessary coexistence legislation needed to introduce GM crops to England when the Scottish and Welsh Governments remain steadfastly opposed to GM cultivation and the Scots even oppose coexistence regulation because they find it incompatible with their moratorium on all GM crops. These are serious policy problems given the clear risk that English GM farming will contaminate Welsh and Scottish farms across national borders. 

Given the incompatibility of GM and non-GM farming, the organisation is asking the UK Government if it will now support full liability being placed firmly on GM patent holders for all economic and environmental damage caused by their products, including biotech companies paying into a compensation fund and new measures to ensure that those wishing to bring GM products to market bear the costs of the necessary segregation, rather than the other way around as is now the case.

Mitchell added, “UK Government support for GM crops is ill-founded, the practicalities have not been thought through, and the underlying problems are not going to go away. While the UK Government continues to act as a cheerleader for GM crops, we can’t see how it will be able to protect farmers and consumers who want to exercise their right to avoid GMOs or how it will ensure it isn’t non-GM farmers who pay the price for the inevitable contamination GM crops will cause. We’re appealing to the UK Government to do the right thing, listen to the lessons learned elsewhere and withdraw from its misplaced support for GM crops before it is too late.” 

Contact:
Eve Mitchell, EU Food Policy Advisor +44 (0)1381 610 740 [email protected] 

c/o Rose Cottage

Farness

Poyntzfield

Dingwall

The Black Isle   IV7 8LY 

tel + 44 (0)1381 610 740 

US Family Farmers Warn EU Ministers Against GM Cultivation in Advance of Critical Vote

Categories

Food

Brussels —The National Family Farm Coalition, representing family farmers across the US, has sent a clear warning against any escalation of GM crop reliance on chemicals in Europe. 

The message was sent in a letter to every EU Agriculture and Environment Minister as EU officials prepare for a key vote on the authorisation for cultivation of GM maize Pioneer1507, which is both tolerant to the herbicide glufosinate ammonium (sold as Liberty or Basta) and contains the GM Bt gene, making the crop toxic to pests. 

Katherine Ozer, executive director of the National Family Farm Coalition in the US warned Ministers:

“Farmers nationwide have experienced extensive (and expensive) losses from 2,4-D and dicamba drift, and crops resistant to them are not yet even deregulated. We are very concerned that escalated reliance on these and similar toxins could lead to the demise of fresh water, tree and wildlife cover, and all non-GM crops – ultimately our environment and food system as we know them.”

Multiple objections to authorising Pioneer 1507 for cultivation in Europe include:

  • It is reliant on glufosinate ammonium, an herbicide with considerable health and environmental risks that has not been properly assessed in the EU, making this application premature at best.
  • The crop also carries the GM Bt gene, making it toxic to pests. Existing GM Bt crops are already failing in fields in the US, Brazil and India as the target insects develop resistance. The Brazilian Government is now warning that reliance on Bt crops is causing the severe economic damage facing GM farmers. Maharastra State Agriculture Minister Ramakrishna Vikhe-Patil said of Bt cotton: “In the long run, we want to eradicate it because it is water-intensive and utterly unsuited to our conditions since 82% of the 4.2 million hectares of Bt cotton cultivation is done in drought-prone areas…[Agriculture researchers and universities] did not do enough to alert the Government to the potential dangers of Bt cotton.”
  • EFSA admits Pioneer 1507 will harm non-target insects, like butterflies. There has been no assessment of its impact on other pollinators, which already face a host of threats endangering our future food production.
  • GM agriculture is not wanted by EU citizens and is not necessary, as most

recently demonstrated by Heinemann et al: Despite the claims that GM might be needed to feed the world, we found no yield benefit when the United States was compared to W. Europe, other economically developed countries of the same latitude which do not grow GM crops. We found no benefit from the traits either. 

Food & Water Europe’s EU Food Policy Advisor Eve Mitchell commented:

“The science shows non-GM is the future of food and farming. The courts told the Commission to process this application, but it has not been sufficiently scrutinised so we do not know if it is safe, so there is every reason for Member States to reject it. 

“We want a healthy, productive future for European agriculture, and we can clearly see that countries that rushed to jump on the GM bandwagon are now suffering as the technology fails. European Ministers need to think very carefully about the warnings from farmers in the US and the Governments of both Brazil and Maharashtra – growing GM causes worse problems than it solves.”

Only two other GM crops are permitted in EU fields. One is the industrial starch potato Amflora, which was approved by the Commission amid considerable controversy and has never recovered from the debacle in its first year of cultivation when another, unauthorised GM potato contaminated the seed stock and much of the crop had to be destroyed. The authorisation for Amflora was annulled on 13 December by the EU General Court, which found that the Commission had not properly followed necessary procedures when it approved the crop. The other GM crop grown in the EU is the controversial MON810 Bt maize, which is banned in several EU countries and is the subject of ongoing scientific controversy over its negative environmental impacts.  

For further information contact: 

Eve Mitchell, EU Food Policy Advisor, Food & Water Europe  +44 (0)1381 610 740 

Katherine Ozer, Executive Director, National Family Farm Coalition (US) +1 202 543 5675

National Family Farm Coalition unites and strengthens the voices and actions of its diverse grassroots members to demand viable livelihoods for family farmers, safe and healthy food for everyone, and economically and environmentally sound rural communities.

EU Must Draw a Line Under GMOs as Superweeds, Herbicide Use Soar

Categories

Food

Brussels — On the eve of a key meeting of EU Member State representatives, Food & Water Europe today called on EU Member States to reject the application to authorise imports of a new so-called “stacked” GM maize. Citing its new report, Superweeds: How Biotech Crops Bolster the Pesticide Industry, the organisation says it is time to admit that the GM technology cannot deliver on its promises and instead has caused escalating problems the EU can no longer ignore.

“For nearly 20 years, herbicide-tolerant GM crops have been marketed as a way to improve yields, lower costs for farmers and reduce agriculture’s environmental impact. Not only have these claims not held up, they’ve backfired,” said Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director of Food & Water Europe. “The chemical arms race that industrial agriculture is waging against weeds in the U.S. is not working and is doing incalculable harm to our environment and human health.”

SmartStax maize, a joint Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences product, is an attempt by industry to address the rapid spread of glyphosate-resistant superweeds and insects as a result of existing GM cultivation – genetically modified to produce six internal insecticides and tolerant to both glyphosate and glufosinate. By combining multiple resistance genes into the crop the companies behind it hope it will slow the spread of superweeds, but Food & Water Europe points out that it is precisely these combinations that are the problem. The safety of the GM genes has been assessed individually, but the effects on people, livestock and the environment are unknown. They are also likely to make on-farm problems worse, not better, including leading to the use of far more dangerous chemicals like 2-4,D when new resistance inevitably emerges.

Despite being genetically modified with the sole purpose of helping farmers fight weeds, glyphosate-tolerant GM crops, primarily Monsanto’s Roundup Ready maize, have spurred a crisis of weed management for farmers. The Food & Water Europe report released today analyses U.S. Department of Agriculture and Environmental Protection Agency data to show the connection between the rapid proliferation of GM crops and affiliated pesticides in the United States and the rise of herbicide-resistant “superweeds” that have led to the steadily increasing use of more dangerous herbicides. The widely-used glyphosate herbicides have become ineffective as the weeds develop stronger resistance due to continuous over-exposure to the chemical. As glyphosate proves to be increasingly ineffective, more farmers are turning to more dangerous herbicides, and the biotech industry is keen to provide new products it claims will help ease the crisis.

Food & Water Europe EU Food Policy Advisor Eve Mitchell said, “European politicians and regulators need to heed the warning that GM crops are an escalation of weed management problems, not a solution, and to reject all applications for Roundup Ready or other herbicide tolerant GM crops for import or cultivation, starting with SmartStax maize. We should not grow them in the EU because they cause harm and set back sustainable farming. We should not import them because these problems are now sufficiently serious that is it no longer acceptable to turn a blind eye by encouraging this GM production elsewhere. Europe cannot claim to foster sustainable farming or sustainable development if it is exporting the damage caused by its choices to other countries and expecting those communities to pay the price.

“Rather than extending GM use, which we know consumers reject, we want clear labels on food products showing where GM is and isn’t used as ingredients or feed. Continuing to sell meat and eggs using hidden GM feed while adding more dangerous, untested combinations to the chain is simply unacceptable. The market can’t function properly if shoppers don’t know what they are buying.”

The report also examines the costs associated with GM crops and herbicide-resistant weeds, including reduced yields, increased effort to combat weed infestations and resulting increase in pesticide exposure and chemical residues that harm public health, the environment, wildlife and water quality.

The “Superweeds” Report is available here: http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/superweeds_eu_version.pdf

And an accompanying video based on the report can be found here: http://fwwat.ch/superweedvideo

Contact: Eve Mitchell, +44 (0)1381 610 740 or [email protected]