| Problems for contract Harvesters associated with GM canola
The farming community is divided, some growers want to grow GM canola to see if it lives up to the hype of its promotion, while many do not want to grow it and do not want to be adversely impacted by it.
Harvesting a GM crop will provide no problems for the contract harvester as contamination of a GM crop with non-GM material poses no threat to markets.
However, harvesting a non-GM crop for a farmer that wants to comply with market demand and the law will.
Legally, the ACCC has confirmed that, despite the acceptance of a tolerance level of GM, to label a product as "non-GM" or "GM-free" the product must not contain any GM material. Supply chains are demanding farmers sign to guarantee the product has no GM and to indemnify the supply chain if contamination is found.
There is a price penalty associated with GM canola contamination. Since Canada adopted GM canola and segregation failed. Since then, Canada lost their consistent premium over Australian canola (ABARE statistics show $US32.68/tonne from 1990-2000) and are now selling for up to $US30/tonne less than Australian non-GM canola (Graincorp report on Chinese prices). If non-GM canola is contaminated, non-GM growers not only face a price penalty, but they may be liable for recall and contamination cleanup costs of the supply chain.
Although contamination tolerance levels have been accepted by industry, these levels do not comply with law or market demand and are not practical as there are no quantitive field tests available to test for GM levels.
If GM canola is grown near a non-GM farmers crop, rather than rely on the GM grower to contain their product, the coexistence principles require the non-GM grower to take what practical steps they need to avoid contamination. One of those steps required by the identity preservation system needed is to adopt a buffer zone to prevent crosspollination. This buffer zone must be classified as GM canola and may be 400metres wide, or wider if contamination is not accepted at all.
How will a contract harvester manage to swath and harvest a GM buffer zone in the same paddock as a non-GM crop?
A complete machinery cleanout is required when moving from a GM canola buffer zone to a non-GM canola crop. Despite this, approx 6kg of canola seed could be transferred to the non-GM canola crop. Different storage will be needed for both the GM buffer zone produce and the non-GM seed and all augers etc will need a thorough cleanout. Who will pay for this additional time?
Who will be liable? Will contract harvesters require farmers to sign to indemnify harvesters for contamination they may cause? Will this cause a loss to your business?
State governments have the role to assess economics, if the Harvesters Association is likely to experience economic loss or an unmanageable situation, they must lobby state governments to ensure they take this into consideration when considering lifting the ban.
How can this problem be managed? How can contractors and farmers be exempted from liability for a product that is known not to be controllable and known to have the potential to cause economic loss? Should't the GM industry accept liability for the economic loss caused by their product?
Julie Newman
Network of Concerned Farmers
Phone 08 98711562 or 0427 711644 |
