California voters to decide on GMO labeling

www.CARightToKnow.org announces the following huge step towards mandatory labelling of genetically engineered foods:

Polls show overwhelming support for historic labeling initiative

(First reported June 12, 2012)  Last night, the California Secretary of State’s office announced that the Right to Know initiative to label genetically engineered foods will be on the state’s November ballot. The historic initiative would be the first law in the United States requiring labeling of a wide range of genetically engineered foods.

“We’re thrilled that Californians will have the opportunity this November to vote for the right to know what’s in our food,” said Stacy Malkan, a spokesperson for the California Right to Know campaign. “This initiative is pretty simple. It's about our fundamental right to make informed choices about the food we eat and feed our families.”

The initiative requires labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) – which are plants or meats that have had their DNA artificially altered by genes from other plants, animals, viruses, or bacteria, in order to produce foreign compounds in that food. This type of genetic alteration occurs in a laboratory and is not found in nature.

Polls show nearly unanimous support across the political spectrum for labeling of genetically engineered foods. Nine out of ten voters in the U.S. and in California back labeling, according to recent polls (see Mellman 2012, Reuters 2010, Zogby 2012). An April poll by San Francisco TV station KCBS found 91% backed labeling.

The California Right to Know initiative is backed by a broad array of consumer, health and environmental groups, businesses and farmers. Major endorsers include Public Citizen, Sierra Club, American Public Health Association, United Farm Workers, California Certified Organic Farmers, Organic Consumers Association, Consumer Federation of America, Nature’s Path, Lundberg Family Farms, Organic Valley, Dr. Bronner’s, Eden Foods, Mercola.com, Center for Food Safety, Food Democracy Now! and the California State Grange.

Grant Lundberg, CEO of Lundberg Family Farms in the Sacramento Valley, noted that the United States stands out as one of the few developed nations that does not provide consumers with simple labels to inform them if their food has been genetically engineered. “More than 40 other countries - including all of Europe, Japan and even China - already label genetically engineered food. Californians deserve to be able to make informed choices too," Lundberg said.

"As a doctor committed to the health of people and the environment, I strongly believe that people have a right to know, and to choose for themselves, whether to eat foods that have been genetically engineered," said Robert Gould, MD, president of the SF-Bay Area chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility.

Susan Lang, a Sacramento mother of two who was one of thousands of volunteers who worked to place the initiative on the ballot, said passing the Right to Know initiative is in the best interests of everyone in the state. "I want to know whether the food I’m buying contains genetically engineered ingredients. All the parents I know want to have this information too,” Lang said. 

The California Right to Know initiative is widely regarded as the best chance to achieve GMO labeling in the United States, and the campaign has generated significant national interest in the growing movement for transparency in our food system, as reported in a recent front-page New York Times story.

In March, more than one million people submitted comments to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on a petition for mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods, more than any other petition in FDA history. Twenty states have tried to legislate GMO labeling, but none have succeeded due to intense opposition from corporate special interests.

“All eyes are on California, and the voters of this state will support our right to know what’s in our food when they vote this November,” said Stacy Malkan from the Right to Know campaign.

More info: Contact Stacy Malkan, 510-542-9224; Stacy@carighttoknow.org

For more information about the California Right to Know campaign, see www.CARighttoKnow.org.

Poppies, daisies, and a rainbow

It has been a challenging spring. After the balmy winter came sudden heat in late March, followed by a spate of frosts in April, generous warmth in May, and now a series of heavy downpours in early June. It is no wonder that some crops struggle to adjust to this mixed bag of offerings from above. Farmers are having to contend with poor seasons for asparagus and fruits like apples and  peaches, the fruits not having set because of the frosts. Salad greens and starter plants in the greenhouses performed miracles early on, then flagged in the sudden onset of extended heat. Early markets saw healthy sales of arugula, baby kale, Swiss chard, beet tops, and lovely baby spinach and baby lettuce mix. The greenhouses then over-heated, and so began the annual anxious wait for the transition to field production to materialize. It is never smooth and recent washout rains have set things back significantly. So, sorry to Riverdale farmers market customers for not yet putting in an appearance. And sorry to restaurant buyers ready to roll with our tardy fresh local organic field greens.

As for us on the farm, life remains sprinkled with blessings – a cherished visit from my sister Jill who lives in Berlin and hadn’t been here to share our home in the hills before; birthdays prompting a happy spring fling with friends on a delightful holiday weekend evening; and now, after yet another thunderstorm brought buckets more rain, we are treated to the sight of poppies and daisies enveloped in a late afternoon rainbow. Now, let the sun shine in and the rows of greens, herbs and root crops explode into growth. Alongside these we have lavender, garlic, sunflowers and tomato season to look forward to. We have a lot of work to do to bring it all to market, with local help coming this year from Ray, Arie, Anne, and Jocelyn.

'Agent Orange' GM Corn

Published on Tuesday, April 10, 2012 by CommonDreams.org

EPA Paves Pathway for 'Agent Orange' GM Corn

EPA rejects petition to ban pesticide; Paves way for widespread use on Dow Chemical's genetically modified corn seeds

- Common Dreams staff

The Environmental Protection Agency rejected a petition to ban the sale of the 2,4-D pesticide, a major ingredient in the Vietnam-era defoliant 'Agent Orange'. Despite its current widespread availability, use of 2,4-D could skyrocket soon because its main manufacturer, Dow Chemical, is hoping to receive approval to sell genetically modified corn seeds that are resistant to 2,4-D.

The decision from the EPA came in response to a lawsuit from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in January of this year, who filed the suit after the EPA refused to respond to a petition the environmental group first submitted in 2008.

“This dangerous pesticide is lurking all over the place – from ball fields and golf courses, to front lawns and farms – exposing an enormous amount of the American public to cancer and other serious health risks,” NRDC senior scientist Dr. Gina Solomon said, during the announcement of the move in January. “There’s no reason to continue allowing a toxic Agent Orange-ingredient in the places our children play, our families live and our farmers work. EPA must step up and finally put a stop to it.”

The EPA's decision on Monday, however, rejected the idea that 2,4-D was a health or "safety" threat, and even pointed to a Dow Chemical conducted study to support their decision.

The Center for Food Safety, who worked alongside NRDC to push the ban, expressed deep concern for the increased use of 2,4-D if Dow's new corn seeds are approved. “Dow’s ‘Agent Orange’ corn will trigger a large increase in 2,4-D use—and our exposure to this toxic herbicide—yet USDA has not assessed how much, nor analyzed the serious harm to human health, the environment or neighboring farms,” said Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety. “This novel corn will foster resistant weeds that require more toxic pesticides to kill, followed by more resistance and more pesticides—a chemical arms race in which the only winners are pesticide/biotechnology firms.”

*  *  *

The New York Times reports:

[NRDC] cited various studies suggesting that exposure to 2,4-D could cause cancer, hormone disruption, genetic mutations and neurotoxicity. It also said the E.P.A., in previous assessments, had underestimated how much people, especially children, might be exposed to the chemical through dust, breast milk and skin contact.

In its ruling, the E.P.A. said that while some studies cited suggested that high doses of the chemical could be harmful, they did not establish lack of safety, and in some cases they were contradicted by other studies.

The agency in particular cited a study, financed by the 2,4-D manufacturers and conducted by Dow, in which the chemical was put into the feed of rats. The study did not show reproductive problems in the rats or problems in their offspring that might be expected if 2,4-D were disrupting hormone activity, the E.P.A. said.

*  *  *

Center for Food Safety: The Danger of 'Agent Orange' Corn

If approved, millions of acres of “Agent Orange” corn could be planted as early as next year, raising concern for its adverse health impacts. 2,4-D was one of the main ingredients in Agent Orange, the chemical defoliant used by the U.S. in the Vietnam War. Agent Orange was contaminated with dioxins, a group of highly toxic chemical compounds, which are responsible for a host of serious medical conditions—from diabetes to cancer to birth defects—in Vietnam veterans as well as Vietnamese and their children. Industry’s own tests show that 2,4-D is still contaminated with dioxins.

“Many studies show that 2,4 D exposure is associated with various forms of cancer, Parkinson’s Disease, nerve damage, hormone disruption and birth defects,” said Dr. Amy Dean, an internal medicine physician and president-elect of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine. “Because it poses significant health risk, exposure should not be increased, but significantly reduced to protect the public’s health.”

2,4-D drift and runoff also pose serious risk for environmental harm. Because it is such a potent plant-killer, 2,4-D can harm animals by killing the plants they depend on for habitat and food. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Marine Fisheries Service have found that 2,4-D is likely having adverse impacts on several endangered species, even now. 2,4-D is currently used to control weeds primarily in cereal grains and lawns. Its use in corn has been extremely limited. USDA’s approval of 2,4-D resistant GE corn will increase the overall use of this toxic herbicide, worsening these impacts and likely placing many other species at risk.

American farmers are also rightly concerned that the introduction of 2,4-D resistant corn will threaten their crops: 2,4-D drift is responsible for more episodes of crop injury than any other herbicide. “In my experience, 2,4-D is an herbicide that can and does drift considerable distances to damage neighboring crops,” said Indiana farmer Troy Roush. “We can expect greatly increased use of 2,4-D with Dow’s new corn, and that could wreak havoc with soybeans, tomatoes and other crops my neighbors and I grow.”

The advent of Dow’s 2,4-D resistant corn is a clear indication that first-generation genetically engineered, herbicide-resistant crops—Monsanto’s Roundup Ready (RR) varieties—are rapidly failing. RR crops, which comprise 84 percent of world biotech plantings, have triggered massive use of glyphosate (Roundup’s active ingredient) and an epidemic of glyphosate-resistant weeds. These resistant “superweeds” are regarded as one of the major challenges facing American agriculture.

Freshthemovie.com presents the option of signing a petition:

The USDA is taking public comments until Friday, April 27th. Weigh in to say: We do not need Dow’s 2,4-D seeds.

Why would farmers even be interested in 2,4-D seeds? The reason is that the previous generation of GM seeds-developed to tolerate Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide-have led to the growth of Roundup-resistant weeds. This epidemic of “superweeds” has alarmed farmers and scientists, triggering even more herbicide applications and the desire to use older, even more toxic chemicals, like 2,4-D.

But that’s not the solution - that’s just staying on an ever faster treadmill of chemical and agribusiness dependence. Monsanto assured us that resistant weeds would never spring up from using Roundup Ready seeds. Why would 2,4-D seeds be a better solution?

Let’s put an end to this mad cycle: Sign the petition to tell our regulators we’ve had enough of herbicide-resistant seeds and short-sighted solutions.

Exposing the Myth of So-Called Natural Foods

                                           Row after row of "natural" foods at Whole Foods Market.

Excerpt from an article by Ronnie Cummins, Organic Consumers Association, Feb 9, 2012

Full article: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_24844.cfm

Millions of health-minded Americans, especially parents of young children, now understand that cheap, non-organic, genetically engineered, industrial food is hazardous. Not only does chemical- and energy-intensive factory farming destroy the environment, impoverish rural communities, exploit farm workers, inflict unnecessary cruelty on farm animals, and contaminate the water supply, but the end product itself is inevitably contaminated.

Routinely contained in nearly every bite or swallow of non-organic industrial food are genetically engineered ingredients, pesticides, antibiotics and other animal drug residues, pathogens, feces, hormone-disrupting chemicals, toxic sludge, slaughterhouse waste, chemical additives and preservatives, irradiation-derived radiolytic chemical by-products, and a host of other hazardous allergens and toxins.

If common sense weren't enough, scientists warn us that a public health Doomsday Clock is ticking. Big Biotech and Big Ag are the root cause of 80 million cases of food poisoning every year in the US, as well as an epidemic of allergies, reproductive disorders, food-related cancers, heart attacks, and obesity.  Within a decade, these diet- and environment-related diseases - heavily subsidized under our Big Pharma/chemical/genetically-engineered/factory farm system - will likely bankrupt Medicare and the entire U.S. health care system.

Likewise, millions of green-minded consumers understand that industrial agriculture poses a terminal threat to the environment and climate stability. A highly conscious and passionate segment of the population is beginning to understand that converting to non-chemical, non-genetically engineered, energy-efficient, carbon-sequestering organic farming practices, and drastically reducing food miles by relocalizing the food chain, are essential preconditions for stabilizing our out-of-control climate and preparing our families and communities for future energy and resource shortages.

Millions of us - consumers, farmers, activists - now realize that unless we act quickly, global warming and climate chaos will soon severely disrupt industrial agriculture and long-distance food transportation, leading to massive crop failures, food shortages, famine, war, and pestilence. Even more alarming, accelerating levels of greenhouse gases (especially from cars, coal, cattle, and related rainforest and wetlands destruction) will soon push global warming to a tipping point that will melt the polar icecaps and possibly unleash a cataclysmic discharge of climate-destabilizing methane, now sequestered in the fragile arctic tundra.

Thanks to this growing consumer awareness - and four decades of hard work - the organic community has built up a $30-billion "certified organic" food and products sector that prohibits the use of genetic engineering. The rapidly expanding organic/natural products sector - organic (4% of total retail sales) and natural (8%) - now constitutes more than 12% of total retail grocery sales, with an annual growth rate of 10-15%.  Even taking into account what appears to be a permanent economic recession and a lower rate of growth than that seen over the past 20 years, the organic and natural market will likely constitute 31-56% of grocery sales in 2020.

This consumer-driven movement, under relentless attack by the biotech and Big Food lobby, and with little or no help from government, has managed to create a healthy and sustainable alternative to America's disastrous, chemical- and energy-intensive system of industrial agriculture. Millions of organic consumers are now demanding food and other products that are certified organic and non-GE, as well as locally or regionally produced, and minimally processed and packaged.

The myth of "natural" remains a threat

As impressive as this $30-billion Organic Alternative is, it remains overshadowed by an additional $50 billion in annual spending by consumers on products marketed as "natural."

Recent polls indicate that many green-minded consumers remain confused about the qualitative difference between products labeled or advertised as "natural," versus those labeled as organic. Many believe that "natural" means "almost organic," or that a natural product is even better than organic.

Walk down the aisles of any Trader Joe's, Whole Foods Market, or any upscale supermarket and look closely. What do you see? Row after row of attractively displayed, but mostly non-organic "natural" (i.e. conventional) foods and products. By marketing sleight of hand, these conventional foods, vitamins, private label items, and personal care products become "natural" or "almost organic" (and overpriced) in the "natural" supermarket setting.

It's no wonder - and no accident - that consumers are confused. Companies selling these products are simply telling us what we want to hear, so they can charge a premium price.

In fact, all these "natural," "all-natural," and "sustainable," products are neither backed up by rules and regulations, nor a third-party certifier. Most "natural" or conventional products - whether produce, dairy, or canned or frozen goods - are produced on large industrial farms or in processing plants that are highly polluting, chemical-intensive and energy-intensive. 

Test these so-called "natural" products in a lab and what will you find? Pesticide residues, Genetically Modified Organisms, and a long list of problematic and/or carcinogenic synthetic chemicals and additives.

Trace these "natural" products back to the farm or factory and what will you find? Climate destabilizing chemical fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, and sewage sludge - not to mention exploited farm workers and workers in the food processing industry. Of course there are many products in WFM, Trader Joe's and other natural food retailers that bear the label "USDA Organic." But the overwhelming majority of their products are not.

Perhaps this wouldn't matter if we were living in normal times, with a relatively healthy population, environment, and climate. Conventional products sold as "natural" or "nearly organic" would be just one more example of of chicanery or consumer fraud.

But we are not living in normal times.

Demanding that natural and conventional products and producers make the transition to organic is a matter of life or death. And standing in the way of making this great transition are not only Fortune 500 food and beverage corporations, Monsanto, and corporate agribusiness, as we would expect, but the wholesale and retail giants in the natural products sector as well.

The full transformation to organic begins with us

We cannot continue to hand over 88% of our consumer dollars to out-of-control, biotech, chemical-intensive, energy-intensive, greenhouse gas- polluting corporations and "profit-at-any-cost" retail chains such as Wal-Mart.

We must not allow the "natural" sector to degenerate into a "green-washed" marketing tool that merely disguises unhealthy and unsustainable food and farming practices. We must not allow "natural" to become a green shield for Monsanto and the biotech industry in their quest to take over global agriculture.

Instead, we must demand that the "natural" sector move our nation toward an organic future.  How - and how quickly - can we move healthy, organic, and "natural" products from a 12% market share, to becoming the dominant force in American food and farming?

This is a major undertaking, one that will require a major transformation in public consciousness and policy.

But it is doable.  And absolutely necessary.

The first step - before we overthrow Monsanto, Wal-Mart, and Food Inc. - is to put our own house in order.  That means shopping for certified organic products.

What does certified organic or "USDA Organic" mean? Certified organic means the farmer or producer has undergone a regular inspection of its farm, facilities, ingredients, and practices by an independent third-party certifier, accredited by the USDA National Organic Program (NOP). The producer has followed strict NOP regulations and maintained detailed records. Genetically engineered ingredients, synthetic pesticides, animal drugs, sewage sludge, irradiation, and chemical fertilizers are prohibited. Farm animals, soil, and crops have been managed organically. Food can be processed using only approved methods. Ingredients must be on the "allowed" list.

If every one of us pays close attention to the labels on our food - choosing certified organic over "natural" - we can increase demand for organic, sustainable, healthy foods.

Step two? Demand that your local and state legislators pass labeling laws so that all so-called "natural" products move in a "transition-to-organic" direction. Tell your elected officials that you have the right to know what is - and isn't - in your food.

If we all work together, the U.S. will be well on its way to solving three of the nation's most pressing problems: deteriorating public health, climate change, and the energy crisis.

Don't be fooled. Stop buying so-called "natural" products unless you have no other choice. Buy certified "USDA Organic" products today and every day. Your health and the health of the planet are at stake. And please join the rapidly growing campaign in California and other states to force mandatory labels on GE foods and to make it illegal to label or advertise GE-tainted foods as "natural" or "all natural."

Ronnie Cummins is the International Director of the Organic Consumers Association.

The winter that wasn't

As a stiff very mild wind blows in, the scant snow cover is melting away fast. What happened to winter this year? We went away for a delicious three weeks on Costa Rica’s wild Pacific coast and came back to pools of ice following not snow but rain. The mean daytime temperature in January was several degrees above freezing. No wonder then that the ground in the hoophouses did not even properly freeze all winter, when we are accustomed to two to three months of freeze-up. Though crops would have barely grown, we could have enjoyed greens all winter long; we made do with a tasty supply of arugula left in one bed from the fall.

In line with the wacky weather, Nature is ahead of schedule. With the ground thawing, the robins were back in early February, and the goldfinches, blue jays, woodpeckers, nuthatches, and chickadees have been busy at the sunflower seed feeder. The deer are venturing out from the woods and feeding on morcels of green and fallen mushy apples revealed by the retreating snow. Wild turkeys too scratch the surface and gobble up seeds, shoots, and dirt. Bear prints are noted in the snow of our lower field, and a dazed raccoon forages in the compost heap before waddling off into the bushes. It is time for me too to venture out from semi-hibernatory mode to get to work, working in manure by digging over the soil in the hoophouses ready for the first plantings of spring. This week, second week in March as always, I’ll start some seeds in trays – parsley, chervil, kales, then plant beds of arugula, spinach, kale, chard, mixed and spicy greens. This will be followed by succession seedings and plantings through the rest of March and April, so that we have the first spring salad greens ready for market in mid-April, which is not far off. Spring really is just around the corner.

We’ve already started back at the Evergreen Brickworks farmers market on Saturdays. We won’t be going every week until mid-April, but it was nice to be greeted back by staff, vendors, and customers last Saturday. We’re keen to get our new fresh batch of Seville Orange Marmalade out there, having doubled production after strong sales last year. It is a wonderfully tangy fruity mix of oranges and lemons, some made with raw organic sugar, and some with an added splash of Scotch whisky for a smooth and decadent finish. Also available are Chris’s wonderful lemon and garlic olive oils, and maple bourbon and orange brandy cranberry sauces to go with chicken, turkey, strong cheeses. In the coming weeks we are offering grass-fed and grass-finished beef (ground, stewing, roasts, sausages) and steaks will be back on the menu in April. We take in one animal at a time to the local processor and sell the highly-nutritious beef exclusively at Brickworks farmers market. 

State of the Organic Union (Toronto)

Wilhelm and Barnhild Pfenning

It seems that every other year my spirit tells me it is time to check in on the world of organics via the Toronto conference organized by Canadian Organic Growers (COG) Toronto chapter. My first conference was four years ago in 2008 when I became inspired by the words of Hellge Hellberg of Marin Organic. I came away from the conference feeling as if I had arrived where I belonged – amongst organic growers and consumers empowered with a united vision of doing the right thing.

Two years later, in 2010, the ante was upped by a stellar array of speakers and true organic heroes. Bärbel Höhn, Germany’s first Green Party agricultural minister, related the incredible political foresight and achievement of Germany in embracing, promoting and implementing organic practices nationwide. Percy Schmeiser told his amazing account of his (one farmer’s) brave battle after being sued by Monsanto. Michael Schmidt brought along his passion for raw milk and came out pulling no punches. Wilhelm and Barnhild Pfenning (who in 1965 made the commitment to farm organically and never looked back) received a lifetime achievement award for their tireless work in growing and marketing organics in Ontario. And Wayne Roberts moderated with his usual mix of insight, passion and humour. My sense of belonging in the organic community deepened as I was inspired by the spirit and drive of these organic groundbreaking visionaries.

So it was that I went along in eager anticipation to this year’s conference, titled “The Value of Organic”. I should have known from this vague theme that I should lower my expectations. In 2008 it had been “Visionary Farmers and Consumers”; in 2010 “Grounds for Change.” This year’s keynote speaker was a farmer who did not even embrace organic certification, remarking in the closing session that she knew some very bad organic farmers and some very good conventional ones. Another speaker was a doctor advocating for an “organic” sleep remedy he had developed and patented which was not certified organic. Guy Dauncey raised the bar with his empassioned presentation, noting that organic certification was “an essential benchmark to prevent greenwashing”. Thank you, Mr. Dauncey, for this simple gem of truth. 

The theme of the closing panel session was “Is Organic too Extreme?”  Conference program notes were littered with organic in inverted commas, angst and soul-searching about the role and future of organics. In my view, whatever organic is and isn’t, whether its too extreme or not extreme enough, too big or too small, it is the only sane and sensible way to approach food and farming as we move forward, both locally and globally. The ever-growing appetite for organic produce and artisan food at farmers markets and farmgates, in health food stores and yes, even in supermarkets, is testament to this. There is much work is to be done on the farm; there is more food to be grown and brought to market for customers to appreciate. The organic movement continues to make waves, offer an alternative to the highly-processed (and now threatened) mainstream. Organic has legs; we should run with them. Missed was a Michael Schmidt or Percy Schmeiser or Helle Hellberg to reinforce Guy Dauncey’s passion to empower, inspire, and sustain us until next year’s conference.  

In the meantime, I have decided to supplement my membership of Canadian Organic Growers by supporting their important role with the donation of our annual farm registration fee of $195 to them. The Government of Ontario mandates that there is a choice only between contributing this fee to the National Farmers Union - Ontario, or the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario, or the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, none of whom focus on organic farming. I resent this limited choice. However, I can request a refund after I have paid my fee, so this is what I shall do. 

The seed emergency: The threat to food and democracy

Photo from http://ncnblogger.wordpress.com/

Patenting seeds has led to a farming and food crisis - and huge profits for US biotechnology corporations.

By Dr Vandana Shiva

From AlJazeera.com http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/02/201224152439941847.html

New Delhi, India - The seed is the first link in the food chain - and seed sovereignty is the foundation of food sovereignty. If farmers do not have their own seeds or access to open pollinated varieties that they can save, improve and exchange, they have no seed sovereignty - and consequently no food sovereignty.

The deepening agrarian and food crisis has its roots in changes in the seed supply system, and the erosion of seed diversity and seed sovereignty.

Seed sovereignty includes the farmer's rights to save, breed and exchange seeds, to have access to diverse open source seeds which can be saved - and which are not patented, genetically modified, owned or controlled by emerging seed giants. It is based on reclaiming seeds and biodiversity as commons and public good.

The past twenty years have seen a very rapid erosion of seed diversity and seed sovereignty, and the concentration of the control over seeds by a very small number of giant corporations. In 1995, when the UN organised the Plant Genetic Resources Conference in Leipzig, it was reported that 75 per cent of all agricultural biodiversity had disappeared because of the introduction of "modern" varieties, which are always cultivated as monocultures. Since then, the erosion has accelerated.

The introduction of the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreement of the World Trade Organisation has accelerated the spread of genetically engineered seeds - which can be patented - and for which royalties can be collected. Navdanya was started in response to the introduction of these patents on seeds in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade - a forerunner to the WTO - about which a Monsanto representative later stated: "In drafting these agreements, we were the patient, diagnostician [and] physician all in one." Corporations defined a problem - and for them the problem was farmers saving seeds. They offered a solution, and the solution was to make it illegal for farmers to save seed - by introducing patents and intellectual property rights on those very seeds. As a result, acreage under GM corn, soya, canola, cotton has increased dramatically.

Threats to seed sovereignty

Besides displacing and destroying diversity, patented GMO seeds are also undermining seed sovereignty. Across the world, new seed laws are being introduced which enforce compulsory registration of seeds, thus making it impossible for small farmers to grow their own diversity, and forcing them into dependency on giant seed corporations. Corporations are also patenting climate resilient seeds evolved by farmers - thus robbing farmers of using their own seeds and knowledge for climate adaptation.

Another threat to seed sovereignty is genetic contamination. India has lost its cotton seeds because of contamination from Bt Cotton - a strain engineered to contain the pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis bacterium. Canada has lost its canola seed because of contamination from Roundup Ready canola. And Mexico has lost its corn due to contamination from Bt Cotton.

After contamination, biotech seed corporations sue farmers with patent infringement cases, as happened in the case of Percy Schmeiser. That is why more than 80 groups came together and filed a case to prevent Monsanto from suing farmers whose seed had been contaminated.

As a farmer's seed supply is eroded, and farmers become dependent on patented GMO seed, the result is debt. India, the home of cotton, has lost its cotton seed diversity and cotton seed sovereignty. Some 95 per cent of the country's cotton seed is now controlled by Monsanto - and the debt trap created by being forced to buy seed every year - with royalty payments - has pushed hundreds of thousands of farmers to suicide; of the 250,000 farmer suicides, the majority are in the cotton belt.

Seeding control

Even as the disappearance of biodiversity and seed sovereignty creates a major crisis for agriculture and food security, corporations are pushing governments to use public money to destroy the public seed supply and replace it with unreliable non-renewable, patented seed - which must be bought each and every year.

 

In Europe, the 1994 regulation for protection of plant varieties forces farmers to make a "compulsory voluntary contribution" to seed companies. The terms themselves are contradictory. What is compulsory cannot be voluntary.

In France, a law was passed in November 2011, which makes royalty payments compulsory. As Agriculture Minister Bruna Le Marie stated: "Seeds can be longer be royalty free, as is currently the case." Of the 5,000 or so cultivated plant varieties, 600 are protected by certificate in France, and these account for 99 per cent of the varieties grown by farmers.

The "compulsory voluntary contribution", in other words a royalty, is justified on grounds that "a fee is paid to certificate holders [seed companies] to sustain funding of research and efforts to improve genetic resources".

Monsanto pirates biodiversity and genetic resources from farming communities, as it did in the case of a wheat biopiracy case fought by Navdanya with Greenpeace, and climate resilient crops and brinjal (also known as aubergine or eggplant) varieties for Bt Brinjal. As Monsanto states, "it draws from a collection of germ-plasm that is unparalleled in history" and "mines the diversity in this genetic library to develop elite seeds faster than ever before".

In effect, what is taking place is the enclosure of the genetic commons of our biodiversity and the intellectual commons of public breeding by farming communities and public institutions. And the GMO seeds Monsanto is offering are failing.  This is not "improvement" of genetic resources, but degradation. This is not innovation but piracy.

For example, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) - being pushed by the Gates Foundation - is a major assault on Africa's seed sovereignty.

Agribusiness

The 2009 US Global Food Security Act, also called the Lugar-Casey Act , "A bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to provide assistance to foreign countries to promote food security, to stimulate rural economies, and to improve emergency response to food crisis, to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and for other purposes".

The amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act would "include research on bio-technological advances appropriate to local ecological conditions, including genetically modified technology". The $ 7.7bn that goes with the bill would go to benefit Monsanto to push GM seeds.

An article in Forbes, titled "Why Uncle Sam Supports Franken Foods", shows how agribusiness is the only sector in which US has a positive trade balance. Hence the push for GMOs - because they bring royalties to the US. However, royalties for Monsanto are based on debt, suicidal farmers and the disappearance of biodiversity worldwide.

Under the US Global Food Security Act, Nepal signed an agreement with USAID and Monsanto. This led to massive protests across the country. India was forced to allow patents on seeds through the first dispute brought by the US against India in the WTO. Since 2004, India has also been trying to introduce a Seed Act which would require farmers to register their own seeds and take licenses. This in effect would force farmers from using their indigenous seed varieties. By creating a Seed Satyagraha - a non-cooperation movement in Gandhi's footsteps, handing over hundreds of thousands of signatures to the prime minister, and working with parliament - we have so far prevented the Seed Law from being introduced.   

India has signed a US-India Knowledge Initiative in Agriculture, with Monsanto on the Board. Individual states are also being pressured to sign agreements with Monsanto. One example is the Monsanto-Rajasthan Memorandum of Understanding, under which Monsanto would get intellectual property rights to all genetic resources, and to carry out research on indigenous seeds. It took a campaign by Navdanya and a "Monsanto Quit India" Bija Yatra ["seed pilgrimage"] to force the government of Rajasthan to cancel the MOU.

This asymmetric pressure of Monsanto on the US government, and the joint pressure of both on the governments across the world, is a major threat to the future of seeds, the future of food and the future of democracy.

Dr Vandana Shiva is a physicist, eco-feminist, philosopher, activist and author of more than 20 books and 500 papers. She is the founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, and has campaigned for biodiversity, conservation and farmers' rights, winning the Right Livelihood Award [Alternative Nobel Prize] in 1993.