Illegal GM maize grown in Ireland

ILLEGAL GM MAIZE GROWN IN IRELAND


MEDIA RELEASE GM-FREE IRELAND,
23 JULY 2010 ILLEGAL GM MAIZE GROWN IN IRELAND
• Government destroys its own field trials
• Pioneer Hi-Bred seeds contaminated by Monsanto’s NK603
• Call for investigation to determine extent of contamination www.gmfreeireland.org/press/GMFI50.pdf DUBLIN and GENEVA —

The Irish Government has been accidentally growing GM maize, despite its own policy to ban field trials and commercial cultivation of GM crops in the Republic. [1] The blunder is doubly embarrassing because this GM maize is an illegal variety that is not allowed for cultivation anywhere in the EU.

The discovery was made by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (DAFF) at four of its own field trial sites including the National Crop Variety Testing Centre at Backweston in Co. Kildare, and at three other undisclosed locations in Counties Kildare, Kilkenny, and Cork. DAFF carried out the field trials with a supposedly Non-GM maize variety PR39T83 supplied by Pioneer Hi- Bred Northern Europe, a subsidiary of DuPont, the world’s second biggest seed company and sixth biggest agrochemicals company. The purpose of the trials was to find out if this conventional maize is “suitable for cultivation and use under Irish farming conditions”.


According to a press release issued late yesterday by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [2], routine tests by DAFF discovered that the Pioneer Hi-Bred maize is contaminated by Monsanto’s patented GM “event” NK603. The genetic modification forces the crop to survive heavy spraying with glyphosate, part of the cocktail of toxic chemicals contained in Monsanto’s controversial Roundup herbicide. [3]

Cultivation of this GM maize is illegal the EU, although importation is allowed for animal feed and human food. It is unclear when DAFF first discovered the contamination. The EPA says it was only notified on 3 June - 3 months after the same seeds were found to be contaminated in Germany, and long after they were sown in Ireland. DAFF re-confirmed the contamination on 19 July.

The EPA says that Pioneer provided a “certificate of analysis” claiming the maize was GM-free. But random tests by DAFF found that 3 out of every 1,000 plants were contaminated by the illegal GM maize variety. That’s about 300 illegal GM crops per hectare. DAFF says it destroyed its fields of contaminated maize plants before they reached the flowering stage, in order to prevent pollen drift that would further contaminate neighbouring conventional and organic farmers, whose crops would then also have to be destroyed.

This is the first time a GM crop has been grown – albeit accidentally - in Ireland since protestors destroyed field trials of Monsanto’s patented GM beets in 1998. Economic threat to Irish farmers and food producers It is unclear how much, if any, of the illegal GM maize seeds have been sold and are now being cultivated by Irish farmers. This would cause large economic losses, and would be an ironic blow for farmers who would lose their biggest maize crop in history, thanks to this year’s unusually hot and sunny summer.

Contamination by pollen drift and seed dispersal from GM maize has already contaminated hundreds of conventional and organic farmers in Spain. [4] Lack of due diligence and false certificates GM-free Ireland spokesperson Michael O’Callaghan said “The Pioneer company has provided false GMfree certificates for its GM seeds on at least two previous occasions. The first was in 2007 when we discovered thousands of tonnes of Pioneer’s Herculex GM maize (which was then illegal) entering the EU through Dublin port [5].

The second scandal occurred in March of this year, when Pioneer and other agribiotech corporations sold 23 different varieties of maize seeds contaminated by Monsanto’s illegal NK603 to farmers who cultivated them on 3,000 hectares (7,400 acres) in seven states in Germany, where contaminated farmers had to destroy their crops. [6]

According to the German-based Foundation on Future Farming [7], the seed companies refused to accept liability and have not compensated farmers for up to hundreds of millions of Euro in economic losses.” “The Department of Agriculture knew this and should therefore have exercised due diligence by testing Pioneer’s maize seeds before the field trials began.

This is another example of the Government’s failure to implement the GM free policy it first agreed three years ago in 2007 and again in 2009.” 2 Call for investigation Michael O’Callaghan called on the Government to answer the following questions so as to protect the ability of Irish farmers and food producers to retain their share of the rapidly growing EU and US markets for GM-free meat and dairy produce. [8]
• Why did the Department of Agriculture (DAFF) trust the GM-free certification provided by Pioneer Hi-Bred, even though it must have known that similar assurances provided in Ireland in 2007 and in Germany in 2010 proved to be false? •
• Why did DAFF not test the seeds before it planted them, in view of the fact that the same contamination by Monsanto’s NK603 was discovered 3 months ago in Germany, in early March?
• When did DAFF make the discovery? Why did it wait until 3 June to notify EPA? And why did EPA wait until 22 July to issue a press release? •
• Will the Government and the Northern Ireland Assembly require Pioneer Hi-Bred to provide a list of its customers in the Republic and Northern Ireland, publish the names of dealers that may have received the contaminated seeds, and make this information publicly available to farmers?
• Does the Government know if the illegal seeds have been sold and planted by Irish farmers? If so, how many acres of maize will have to be destroyed? •
• Will the Government test all maize seed stocks and fields of maize crops for GM contamination? •
• Who will pay the costs for testing, crop destruction, and related economic losses? Will the Government apply the Polluter Pays principle and demand reparation from Pioneer Hi-Bred, or will taxpayers and/or farmers end up having to foot the bill?
• Is this an isolated case? Will the Government now make a commitment to test every shipment of imported seeds for GM contamination, or will it continue business-as-usual with random tests?

ENDS CONTACT Michael O’Callaghan, Founder and Acting Co-ordinator, GM-free Ireland Network Now based in Geneva, Switzerland: tel + 41 22 732 8685 mobile: + 41 948 5491 • mail@gmfreeireland.org • www.gmfreeireland.org NOTES FOR EDITORS 1. In 2007 the Irish Government said it would “seek to negotiate to declare the island of Ireland as a GMO-free zone”, but there is no record of any such negotiations having taken place. Ireland’s official policy to ban GM crops is published on page 11 of the Renewed Programme for Government, 10 October 2009: http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Publications/Publications_2009/Renewed_Programme_for_Government, _October_2009.pdf But as of June 2010, the Government had not even begun to draft any related legislation. 2. Unauthorised release of GM event NK603 in conventional maize seed, EPA press release, 22 June 2010: http://www.epa.ie/news/pr/2010/name,30182,en.html 3. Time and Dose-Dependent Effects of Roundup on Human Embryonic and Placental Cells, Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 53, 126–133 (2007) DOI: 10.1007/s00244-006-0154-8. http://www.springerlink.com For more information on Glyphosate and other toxic ingredients of Monanto’s RoundUp herbicide see: http://www.criigen.org/SiteEn/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=71&Itemid=102 3 4. Testimonies of Contamination, Greenpeace, 15 October 2009. This report documents the socioeconomic and human impacts of GM contamination, based on testimonials from farmers and food producers who have been directly or indirectly harmed as a result of contamination in Spain, the only EU Member State whose government allows the commercial cultivation of GM maize. The testimonials depict the stark reality of serious contamination of conventional and organic crops and the food chain. Download report: http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/eu-unit/press-centre/reports/testimonies-ofcontamination- 15-10-09.pdf 5. A joint Greenpeace / GM-free Ireland investigation discovered thousand of tones of Pioneer’s illegal Herculex GM maize from the USA entering the EU through Ireland in 2007. The shipment was accompanied by laboratory certificates from Eurofins GeneScan Inc. which specifically claimed that the cargo contained no Herculex. But subsequent tests commissioned from Genetic ID by Greenpeace and by the Dutch Government proved contamination by the illegal GMO. The mistake triggered a moratorium on transatlantic shipments of animal feed from the USA to Europe, and hundreds of millions of dollars of losses for grain traders.

For related information see:
• http://www.gmfreeireland.org/pakrac/index.php
• Illegal GM maize enters EU through Ireland, GM-free Ireland press release, 30 April 2007: http://www.gmfreeireland.org/press/GMFI35.pdf
• Ireland’s Genetically Modifed Food Scandal, GM-free Ireland press release, 23 May 2007: http://www.gmfreeireland.org/press/GMFI36.pdf 6. These include five seed varieties sold by Pioneer Hi-Bred and 18 by Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow AgroSciences and other agri-biotech companies. The contamination was discovered by Lower Saxony’s Ministry of Agriculture at the beginning of March 2010. For details see:
• Banned GM maize sown in Germany, BBC News, 7 June 2010: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10254080.stm • Genetically modified corn contaminates crops in seven German states, Deutsche Welle, 7 June 2010: http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5657053,00.htm 7. Foundation on Future Farming: http://www.gmo-free-regions.org/foundation.html 8. See GM-free Irish label good for business: Added value, increased market share, better branding and unique selling point: the most credible GM-free food brand in Europe. GM-free Ireland Network press release, 17 November 2009: http://www.gmfreeireland.org/press/GMFI46.pdf See also: GM-free production: a unique selling point for Ireland - the food island. 47-page briefing with GM-free market survey, 17 Nov. 2009 (1.2MB pdf). http://www.gmfreeireland.org/GMFI-briefing-3.pdf


RELATED

Genetically Manipulated Crops: The GMO Catastrophe in the USA. A Lesson for the World by F. William Engdahl

Protestors of toxic GM crops resort to literally destroying them A worthwhile site to visit if you like news on natural living.

Mr. & Mrs. Potato Head...soon to be regulated.

The regulations flooding out of Congress are alarming to say the least. Here is one that will make small farmers jump through 100 hoops before they can offer their food at a farmers market. Got to keep an eye on these slippery bills....I highly advise reading the entire article to see how this trick is accomplished in 'definitions'. On the darker side, Monsanto is devouring small farmers at such an alarming rate, all our food production may soon be in corporate hands.
Lets not be.......

Change We Can Believe In:
How About the End of Farmers Markets?
Say Hello to H.R. 875:
Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009

What this will do is force anyone who produces food of any kind, and then transports it to a different location for sale, to register with a new federal agency called the “Food Safety Administration.” Even growers who only sell only fruit and/or vegetables at farmers markets would not only have to register, but they would be subject inspections by federal agents of their property and all records related to food production. The frequency of these inspections will be determined by the whim of the Food Safety Administration. Mandatory “safety” records would have to be kept. Anyone who fails to register and comply with all of this nonsense could be facing a fine of up to $1,000,000 per violation.

I’ve bought food at several farmers markets for years and I have yet to meet any vendors who are fond of the government. I think it’s pretty safe to say that most vendors at farmers markets won’t go along with this. The problem will be that the people who run the farmers markets will be forced to make sure that vendors are “registered” with the government.

Is this Change we can believe in? Maybe it is for Obama’s Secretary of Agriculture, Tom “I Fly with Monsanto” Vilsack.

For the rest of us, this is a nightmare. Read entire article here.

Related urls:
Monsanto gobbles up small farmers

Crop Cops - Big brother and agriculture

Monsanto gobbles up small farmers

Theft of Life: A story of the struggle against Monsanto and the corporate takeover of our genetic inheritance

Percy Schmeiser
Source
Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:14 UTC
I am a seed developer from western Canada, where since 1947 my wife and I have been developing a strain of canola that is resistant to certain diseases that we have on the prairies. I am also a seed saver, like hundred of thousands of farmers around the world who save their seed from year to year, to plant and harvest.

I was also the mayor of my community for over twenty five years.

In 1998 without any prior knowledge, Monsanto laid a lawsuit against me alleging that I had infringed their patent by growing their genetically modified conola without a license. It was a real shock to me, as we had never had anything to do with Monsanto.

But the real issue that concerned us was the possibility that our pure seed, which we had developed after half a century of research would now be contaminated. We stood up to Monsanto, arguing that if any genetically modified organisms (GMOs) were present in our pure seed, then Monsanto were liable for destroying the property of others.

It took two years for this case to go to trial at the Federal court of Canada, with one judge, but no jury, and I had no choice in the matter. In the two years of allegations Monsanto withdrew all allegations that I had obtained their seed illegally, but because they had found some GMO canola plants in the ditch along my field, I had infringed their patent. That is the basis on which the case went to the Federal Court of Canada.

This is what the judge ruled: it does not matter how Monsanto's GMOs get into or onto any farmer's field or into a seed supply (He went on to specify how this could happen: direct seed movement by birds, by wind, especially on the prairies, by floods, and through cross-pollination by bees). It doesn't actually matter how the genetically modified organisms get into an organic farmer's field or into the fields of a conventional farmer like myself: once there, those seeds and plants become Monsanto's property."

It was a very startling decision. The judge also ruled that we were not allowed to use our seeds or plants again and that all the seeds and plants that we had developed over 50 years became the property of Monsanto. The judge also ruled that all the profit from my 1998 canola crop was payable to Monsanto. The judge further ruled that even from the land that had no contamination, all profit would be payable to Monsanto because there was a probability that our seed contained some of Monsanto's GMOs.

We immediately applied to the Federal court of Appeal which has three judges but no jury. After a year theAppeal Court upheld the first judge's decision, but did not agree with all his decisions. After this second ruling in 2002, we appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. The case began in January 2004.

There were many issues to be decided, including the whole issue of patenting life forms. At the original trial, Monsanto said that by putting a gene into a seed, they invented the seed. When the seed becomes a plant, they invented the plant. Now if you look at the implications of that: if you put one gene in any seed, or any plant, or any life form, whether it be a bird, an animal, or a fish or a human being - does that say the corporation responsible has invented that life form?

It is an important issue not only of the rights of farmers being able to use their seed from year to year but the whole rights of controlling and owning genes - the controlling and owning of human beings, animals, birds, bees and so on.

In December 2002 the Supreme Court ruled on one very important issue: in Canada you cannot patent a higher life form, including a seed or a plant.

The really worrying thing is how we can lose our rights and freedoms. The contract from Monsanto, takes all farmers' rights away. Here is a paraphrase of a few clauses.

"You cannot use your own seed.

You must always buy your seed each year.

You can only use Monsanto's chemicals.

You have to pay a fixed fee, per acre, per year as license fee or technology charge to Monsanto.

If you commit some violation of this contract

you must sign a non disclosure statement, and

you cannot talk to the press or

you cannot discuss the situation with your neighbor.

So it takes a farmer's freedom of speech and expression away.

There is another clause:

You must permit Monsanto's police force to come into your land for 3 years after you sign this contract. Even though you may only grow their seeds one year, they can go into your grain reservoir, into your silos, onto your land, to inspect and see what you are growing or what you have in storage.

They can ask for your farming records, your income tax records, anything. And you must permit them to do that.

Another clause has been added in 2003 contract :

The clause says you can no longer sue Monsanto, for whatever reason.

So that is why it is important for people to know the true impact of the introduction of GMOs and how rights of people are being taken away by corporations.

Another very important issue is how Monsanto advertise in their brochures. They state that if you think your neighbor is growing Monsanto's GMO canola or Soya beans without license, you should inform on your neighbor. If you inform on your neighbor you get a gift from Monsanto.

Now what happens when Monsanto gets this tip off? They will immediately send 2 of their police out to a farmer's home, and accuse the farmer of growing their product without a licence, and threaten the farmer with the full force of the law.
The effect this has on the community is appalling as the accused try to work out which neighbour informed on them.

These are the methods Monsanto uses to instill fear in farmers, because the best way to control people is by the culture of fear.

There are some other points that need to be borne in mind when considering the implications of Monsanto's business practices:

There is no such thing as containment. Believe me, as a farmer for over half a century. I know that you cannot contain a life form once you put it into the environment. Whatever the level of contamination of plants, whether 1% or 0.3% of genetically modified material, this genetic pollution will become all pervasive. There is no such thing as containment.

There is no such thing as coexistence. Introduce a genetically modified organism into the environment and it becomes dominant. It will contaminate an organic farm or a conventional farm in a matter of just a few years. After the introduction of genetically modified canola in 1996 within two years super weeds had become dominant. Now what is a super-weed? A super-weed in this case is mutant canola which carried genes modified by two other companies as well as those of Monsanto. These modified genes are now all in one plant it has become a super weed, polluting the entire western prairies. It is in wheat fields, barley fields, and oat fields, and it takes a new, more powerful highly toxic chemical to kill it. There is no such thing as co-existence.

Organic farmers in Canada can no longer grow two crops: Soya beans and canola. All our seed is contaminated. We can no longer sell one bushel of canola to the European Union. We have lost our markets all over the world.

But I think the greatest curse is still coming. And that's coming in the line of prescription drug plants or 'pharma-plants'. There are six major drugs that are now being produced by genetically modified plants: vaccines, industrial enzymes, blood thinners, blood clotting proteins, growth hormones and contraceptives. What if somebody has had major surgery and they then eat food that is contaminated with genes from a plant manufactured to be a blood thinner? Or what about a pregnant woman who eats food contaminated by genes from a plant that is manufactured as a contraceptive? Remember, there is no such thing as containment or co-existence.

What kind of a legacy do we want to leave to our children and our grandchildren? A legacy of land, food, water and air full of poisons? No we want to leave a legacy of land, food, air and water full of health and vitality. I have a message especially to the younger generation: Your rights and your freedoms can be lost overnight, your choice to eat healthily can be taken away. The law in Canada has enabled corporations to deny the rights of farmers to grow and save their own uncontaminated seeds. We are determined to spend the rest of our lives, if necessary, protecting our human rights.

Crop Cops - Big brother and agriculture

Media Credit: dennisflood.com

Monsanto is ready to round up seed patent violators

Meghna Marjadi and Carolyn Yates
1/7/09
Source

Monsanto Canada Inc. will go to court on January 15 to settle a case with four farmers who allegedly illegally grew, harvested, and sold products developed from patented Monsanto seeds.

The McGill Tribune contacted the farmers involved, but none were willing to comment before they go to court.

The January hearing follows Monsanto's December settlement with three Quebec farmers growing Roundup Ready canola without a license. The farmers agreed to pay $200 per acre.

Monsanto uses genetic engineering to produce the herbicide-resistant Roundup Ready, a line that includes seeds for regular and high-yield soybeans, canola, and high-yield corn. Monsanto also offers other lines of enhanced crops that provide insect protection, weed control, and higher yields. Currently, Monsanto holds between a 70 and 100 per cent market share of various genetically engineered crops.

Monsanto prosecutes farmers who use their patented products without a license. The company encourages people who suspect patent infringement to call a toll-free number to report their claims. In the instance of the Quebec farmers, Monsanto spokesperson Trish Jordan said that people in the area alerted Monsanto to the patent infringement.

"We were told by people in [the farmers']area that they thought that these guys were growing Roundup Ready canola without a license," says Jordan. "We checked their fields and it was Roundup Ready … They weren't accused of it. They admitted that they knowingly planted seeds [without a license]."

But Monsanto's field auditing techniques have come under criticism. The May 2008 issue of Vanity Fair included an account of Monsanto's lawsuit against Gary Rinehart, the owner of a small country store in Eagleville, Missouri. Rinehart was charged by Monsanto with patent infringement-despite the fact that he neither farms nor deals with seeds-based on observations by investigator Jeffery Moore. After bringing Rinehart to court, Monsanto eventually realized Moore had accused the wrong person.

"Monsanto relies on a shadowy army of private investigators and agents in the American heartland to strike fear into farm country. They fan out into fields and farm towns, where they secretly videotape and photograph farmers, store owners, and co-ops; infiltrate community meetings; and gather information from informants about farming activities," Vanity Fair reported.

Jordan, however, insists that Monsanto's tactics are legitimate.

"We do audit surveys every year and 90 per cent [of farmers] go through the audit and have no issue with it. Obviously people who are stealing the technology are going to be a little bit more difficult to work with, but the audit program is conducted completely within the law," says Jordan. "We cannot enter anybody's land without their permission. If we believe there is an expected violation we have to, number one, work with the grower to resolve that, and number two, have evidence that that is indeed the case."

In addition, Jordan notes that the people who complete the audits aren't Monsanto employees, but are rather just contracted for the job.

The threat of random audits prevents most farmers who legally buy Monsanto seeds from breaching contract guidelines, but they don't always address farmers who acquire seeds illegally.

"When a grower is purchasing seeds illegally in the first place, we are not going to know about [it] unless somebody tells us," says Jordan. "Usually it could be another farmer, it could be a neighbour, it could be the local retail outlet. In those situations sometimes we check them out, and there are no issues: the guy has a contract and he is doing everything perfectly legally. In other situations that's not the case, and that was the case with these three [Quebec] growers. They had never purchased the technology properly in the first place and they had used the seed."

Farmers who purchase Monsanto seeds must sign a contract agreeing that they will not use the purchased seeds for more than one growing season or save any seeds from the season's crop (traditionally, farmers keep seeds from one crop to use for the next). Instead, farmers who are Monsanto customers must purchase new Monsanto seeds every year.

"Agronomically, it's going to give you your best chance at productive crop if you purchase new seed every year … If you're a grower that feels adamant about saving and reusing seeds we have no problem with it. You can save and reuse seed all you want, just don't save and reuse the seed that has our technology in it," says Jordan. She admits that not everyone will agree with the agronomic benefits of buying new seed.

"I think there is a lack of knowledge," says Professor Jasminder Singh from McGill's Department of Plant Science. "But I understand that in some cases there are some self-pollinated crops where the seeds can be grown the next year, and in those cases sometimes companies want the farmers to still buy seeds from them."

In the case of the Quebec farmers, the battle with Monsanto is over. But for the farmers in Ontario, and others, the worst is yet to come.