| American Farmers' Declaration on Genetic Engineering in Agriculture
Genetic engineering in agriculture has significantly increased the economic uncertainty of family farmers throughout the USA and the world. American farmers have lost critical markets which are closed to genetically engineered products. Corporate control of the seed supply threatens farmers' independence. The risk of genetic drift has made it difficult and expensive for farmers to market a pure product. Genetic engineering has created social and economic disruption that threatens traditional agricultural practices for farmers around the world. Farmers, who have maintained the consumer's trust by producing safe, reasonably priced and nutritious food, now fear losing that trust as a result of consumer rejection of genetically engineered foods. Many scientists believe genetically engineered organisms have been released into the environment and the food supply without adequate testing. Farmers who have used this new technology may be facing massive liability from damage caused by genetic drift, increased weed and pest resistance, and the destruction of wildlife and beneficial insects.
Because of all the unknowns we, as farmers, therefore demand:
1. a suspension of all further environmental releases and government approvals of genetically engineered seeds and agriculture products.
2. an immediate, independent and comprehensive assessment of the social, environmental, health and economic impacts of genetically engineered seeds and agricultural products.
3. a ban on the ownership of all forms of life including a ban on the patenting of seeds, plants, animals, genes and cell lines.
4. that agrarian people who have cultivated and nurtured crops for thousands of years retain control of natural resources and maintain the right to use or reuse any genetic resource.
5. that corporate agribusiness be held liable for any and all damages that result from the use of genetically engineered crops and livestock that were approved for use without an adequate assessment of the risks posed to farmers, human health and the environment.
6. that the corporations and institutions that have intervened in the genetic integrity of life bear the burden of proof that their actions will not harm human health, the environment or damage the social and economic health of rural communities. Those corporations must bear the cost of an independent review guided by the precautionary principle and conducted prior to the introduction of any new intervention.
7. that consumers in the U.S. and around the globe have the right to know whether their food is genetically engineered and have a right to access naturally produced food.
8. that farmers who reject genetic engineering should not bear the cost of establishing that their product is free of genetic engineering.
9. the protection of family farmers, farmworkers, consumers, and the environment by ending monopoly practices of corporate agribusiness through enforcement of all state and federal anti-trust, market concentration and corporate farming laws; by a renewed commitment to public interest agricultural research led by the land grant colleges; by an immediate shift of funding from genetic engineering to sustainable agriculture; and by expanding the availability of traditional varieties of crops and livestock.
10 an end to mandatory check off programs that use farmers' money to support and promote genetic engineering research and corporate control of agriculture.
What many farmers have found about genetic engineering:
. Genetically engineered agricultural products were released on the market without a fair and open process to assess the risks on human health and the environment or the social and economic risks to farmers and rural communities.
. Family farmers' livelihoods and independence will be further compromised by genetic engineering. Genetic engineering empowers corporate agribusiness to accelerate capital and chemical intensive agriculture at the expense of family farmers and rural communities around the world, increases corporate concentration in agriculture, and poses unknown risks to the safety and security of the food supply.
. Genetic engineering disrupts traditional agricultural practices creating social upheaval in rural communities and threatening agrarian cultures throughout the world.
. Consumers worldwide are rejecting genetically engineered foods, driving down farm prices. This will force significant numbers of family farmers out of business.
. Family farmers have been unfairly forced to assume liability for genetically engineered products that were not adequately tested before being released into the environment and food supply.
. The corporate ownership of genetic resources and the corporate use of genetic engineering in agriculture is not designed to solve the problems farmers face in agriculture such as increased weed resistance, growing staple crops on marginal land, or making traditionally bred crops available to farmers worldwide, but rather to enrich corporations.
. Genetically engineered seeds increase costs to farmers, have failed to perform as promised by corporate agribusiness, and, in some cases, yields have been lower and crops engineered to be herbicide tolerant have required increased use of herbicides manufactured by the corporations that market the seeds.
. The "terminator" gene, which renders corporate seeds sterile and was developed with USDA resources, is an unconscionable technology because it destroys life and destroys the right of farmers worldwide to save seeds, a basic step necessary to protect food security and biodiversity.
Genetic engineering: involves taking a gene from one species and splicing it into another to transfer a desired trait. This could not occur in nature where the transfer of genetic traits is limited by the natural barriers that exist between different species and in this way genetic engineering is completely new and incomparable to traditional animal and plant breeding techniques. Genetic engineering is also called biotechnology. Another name for genetically engineered crops is genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
(Ref: Genetic Engineering, Food and our Environment by Luke Anderson,Chelsea Green, Vermont).
ENDORSERS OF THE FARMERS' DECLARATION ON
GENETIC ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE
American Corn Growers Association California Sustainable
Agriculture Working Group
Citizen Action Coalition of Indiana (CAC) Dakota Resource Council (ND)
Empire State Family Farm Alliance Family Farm Defenders
Federation of Southern Cooperatives Illinois Stewardship Alliance
Indiana Citizen Action Coalition Institute for Agriculture and
Trade Policy
Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement Land Loss Prevention Project (NC)
Land Stewardship Project (MN) Maine Organic Farmers and
Gardeners Assoc
Michigan Organic Food and Farm Alliance Minnesota COACT
The Minnesota Project Missouri Rural Crisis Center
National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture National Catholic Rural Life
Conference
National Family Farm Coalition Northeast Organic Farming
Association (VT)
North American Farm Alliance (OH) Northern Plains Resource
Council (MT)
Ohio Ecological Food and Farming Ass Ohio Family Farm Coalition
Rural Advancement Foundation Int - USA Organic Growers of Michigan
Rural Coalition Rural Vermont
Sustainable Cotton Project Western Colorado Congress
Western Sustainable Agric Working Group Women, Food and Agriculture
--------------------------
Extract from Farm Weekly (WA) Thursday 24,2003
Tim Slater
Missouri farmer Marvin Oerke warned "The license fees are meant to recoup the research costs that the multinational chemical companies have invested in developing GM products.
"We've got to pay for all this research so we're paying $10/ac even today for every bushell, every acre of soybean product," Marvin said.
"Most of the world is not doing that so we've got a little extra cost there involved."
The license fee was $4.50 initially.
"I thought that was horrible and then they went to $6 and I said 'why are you doing that?" Then they went to $7.50."
He said seed cleaining companies had to pay another fee, but the costs were just another "yolk that the American farmer has to carry" to utilise GM technology.
"We've got to re-buy seeds every year and that's a continual cost," Marvin said.
The industry had a scare with the Star Link case when it was revealed that there might be an allergic human reaction to corn afte3r it was mixed with regular corn supplies.
Everybody's super cautious in the US about food safety," Marvin said.
"Hopefully it's all out of the system now, but something like that could still come along. We just kind of wonder down the road what might happen."
There are also concerns about glyphosate resistance.
|
