Organic Farmers Fight Genetic Pollution

USA: FARMERS FIGHT TO SAVE ORGANIC CROPS
by Ben Lilliston. Full article at
<http://www.progressive.org/0901/lil0901.html>

Organic farmers are having an increasingly difficult time preventing
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) from migrating into their fields. And
organic food companies are struggling to ensure the integrity of their
products. For consumers who demand organic foods, the alarm bells are
ringing.

In April, The Wall Street Journal tested twenty food products labeled "GMO
free" and found that sixteen of them contained at least traces of
genetically modified ingredients; five had significant amounts. One of the
companies testing positive, albeit with trace amounts, was Nature's Path
Foods, the largest organic cereal company in the world.

"We have found traces in corn that has been grown organically for ten to
fifteen years," Arran Stephens, president of Nature's Path Foods, told The
New York Times in June. "There's no wall high enough to keep that stuff
contained."

The most popular genetically modified crops grown in the United States are
soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola. Approximately 68 percent of all soybeans
and 26 percent of all corn is genetically engineered in the United States,
according to June statistics from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. But
this is counting only those crops that are designed by genetic engineering,
not those that are contaminated by it.

How much contamination is taking place on organic fields is an unanswered
question.

"For certain crops, it is absolutely pervasive," says David Gould, an
organic certification specialist. "Virtually all of the seed corn in this
country has at least a trace of GMO contamination and often more. Canola is
as bad if not worse. Soy is very problematic, too." Other crops may also
pose risks. Squashes, sugar beets, tomatoes, and potatoes have been approved
for bioengineering. "These are not wide-spread yet," says Gould. "Just give
them time, and they'll be a problem, too."

Organic Trade Association Executive Director Katherine D'Matteo says there
is some misunderstanding about what organic products are. "We've built the
expectation that there is a purity in the world, and even the slightest
contamination is a disaster," she says.

"We're seeing traces appearing somewhat more frequently in organic, but
we're not seeing an escalation to high percentages," says John Fagan, CEO of
Genetic ID, a firm that tests food for many organic and conventional food
companies. "If you compare organic with conventional, it is orders of
magnitude cleaner."

Genetic contamination can come through the sharing of equipment like
combines, elevators, or trucks. And it can also come through seeds. "It is
very difficult to find clean seed," says Gould. "Without good seed, we will
never be able to produce clean crops."

Jim Riddle, Secretary of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB),
encourages farmers to test all organic seeds to ensure they are free of
genetically modified ingredients before planting. Thus far, most organic
seeds have not tested positive for this type of contamination. But the
American Seed Trade Association recently asked the U.S. Department of
Agriculture to establish a tolerance level of 1 percent genetic
contamination for seed that is labeled nonmodified.

"It is a pretty good clue that the seed companies can't manage what they are
doing when they ask for a tolerance level," says Vetter. "They've come right
out and admitted that they can't guarantee non-GMO seed."

The costs associated with trying to keep organic separated from genetically
modified seed are mounting. For farmers, it includes buffer zones, cleaning
equipment, inspections of crops and processing facilities, and frequent
testing. Seed testing costs on average about $10 a bag. After-harvest
testing can cost $400 per sample.

"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. "If you're sharing equipment, does the neighbor have to steam
clean his combine? What about the truck and elevator if it's multi-use?"
A few years ago, there was little incentive for organic farmers to try to
find out whether or not their crops were tainted by genetically modified
organisms. Why risk the monetary loss that could result if you discovered
your crop was contaminated? But now, most organic farmers are doing some
type of testing.

"Your buyers are going to find out," says Vetter. "So farmers are going to
have to test."

Another major concern is the potential for the loss of certification that
allows farmers to sell their products as "organic." If an organic crop tests
positive, a certifier has to make a judgment call, taking into account the
extent of contamination and the farmer's efforts to stop it. The official
could pull the farm's certification, or more likely pull organic
certification for the contaminated crop, says Riddle, whose board is
appointed by the USDA to oversee the implementation of national organic
rules.

"I do think the NOSB needs to look at the threshold or rejection level
issue," says Riddle. "Organic does not mean chemical free or GMO-free, but
it means GMOs are not used in the production. Organic farmers are being
penalized by the actions of their neighbors. The tolerance level should be
very low."

Organic food grown in the United States is fast becoming a major export.
According to the Organic Trade Association, the United States exports more
than $40 million in organic goods to the United Kingdom and an estimated $40
to $60 million to Japan each year. The association estimates that U.S.
organic exports to Europe are growing by 15 percent per year, and by 30 to
50 percent per year to Japan. Most other countries expect that organic
products coming from the United States will be free of genetically modified
ingredients. But that situation could change. In 1999, Europe rejected corn
chips manufactured by the Wisconsin company Terra Prima because of genetic
contamination. The event cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Organic is the fastest expanding sector of the domestic food
business--growing a whopping 20 percent every year since 1990. There are
7,800 certified organic farms in the United States, up from 6,600 in 1999,
according to the Organic Farm Research Foundation. Organic sales will likely
increase from an estimated $5.4 billion in 1998 to more than $9 billion in
2001, according to Datamonitor, the food industry analyst. But if consumers
cannot be assured that they are getting organic products free of genetically
modified ingredients, the market may diminish.

In 1997, when the U.S. Department of Agriculture proposed national standards
that would have considered genetically modified crops to be organic, nearly
300,000 people submitted comments denouncing the plan. A major selling point
of organic foods has been that the standard disallows genetically modified
organisms. Many organic food companies, like Nature's Path, Eden Foods,
Erewhon, and Gardenburger, tout this claim on their labels.

Last December, the organic community roundly hailed the conclusion of a
tortuous ten-year process to develop national standards for organic food
production. While the final standard explicitly excluded genetically
modified crops, it was decidedly vague on the issue of contamination. The
rules appear to allow some genetic impurities, although they do not specify
how much. The rules state, "The presence of a detectable residue of a
product of excluded methods [like genetic alterations] alone does not
necessarily constitute a violation of this regulation. . . . The
unintentional presence of the products should not affect the status of an
organic product or operation."

Organic farmers are fighting back against the biotech industry. 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 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 the state 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.

Organic farmers also have been active in lawsuits against the Environmental
Protection Agency. One suit, filed in October 1999, demands that the EPA
withdraw all genetically modified Bt crops, including StarLink. 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, 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 courts won't necessarily work to the advantage of the organic farmers.
Many in the organic community are still talking about the Percy Schmeiser
case, decided earlier this year in Canada. Monsanto sued Schmeiser for
growing Roundup Ready Canola. Schmeiser claimed that he had not purchased
the seed and that pollen had drifted from a neighbor's farm. The Canadian
court ruled that it didn't matter whether the material drifted or not.
Schmeiser, it said, was infringing on Monsanto's patent rights. The court
ordered him to pay $105,000 to Monsanto.

"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.

Ben Lilliston is the communications coordinator of the Institute for
Agriculture and Trade Policy in Minneapolis. He is the co-author, along with
Ronnie Cummins, of "Genetically Engineered Foods: A Self-Defense Guide for
Consumers" (Marlowe & Company, 2000).