A coalition of wheat groups from Canada, the United States and Australia is increasing the pressure to move ahead on genetically modified wheat.
In a statement released last week, the group said wheat growers in all three countries must work together to ensure that biotech wheat is introduced in a co-ordinated manner to avoid market disruption.
If it’s handled properly, GM wheat will result in a more efficient, sustainable and profitable industry, the coalition says.
But one crucial player in the debate over GM wheat is urging caution.
Read Also
Markets are chill this summer even as tariff threats fly
The panic over U.S. president Donald Trump’s initial tariff threats that tanked markets in March and April is now a receding memory.
The Canadian Wheat Board says it has no objection in principle to the introduction of GM wheat and recognizes the potential benefits, but insists the single most important issue remains customer acceptance.
“Ultimately it all comes down to the consumer,” said CWB spokesperson Maureen Fitzhenry. “If they don’t want it, that’s where the buck stops.”
In the May 14 statement, the coalition presented a list of arguments for moving forward on biotech wheat,:
- Using biotechnology to develop higher yielding, better quality wheat will assist in meeting growing world demand for food.
- Biotechnology can be used to provide agronomic improvements and improve the nutritional content of wheat.
- Wheat acres are being replaced by competing crops like corn and soybeans that enjoy the benefits of biotechnology and provide producers with higher returns.
- During the past 10 years, GM crops have proven to be safe and to provide environmental benefits and quality and productivity gains for producers.
Canadian groups in the coalition are Grain Growers of Canada, the Alberta Winter Wheat Producers Commission and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association.
Richard Philips, executive director of GGC, said the coalition hopes the statement will send a signal to researchers in all three countries to begin developing GM varieties with traits that are beneficial for producers and consumers.
Previous efforts to promote GM wheat have run aground on consumer resistance, but Phillips said he believes that can be overcome with the right products.
“We’re not talking about Roundup Ready wheat, that’s long gone,” he said. “We’re talking about things like drought and heat tolerance, resistance to fusarium and non-allergenic wheat.”
CWB spokesperson Fitzhenry said the marketing agency is working with other industry groups to develop rules and processes for handling GM wheat in the export system.
“We’re not opposed to the idea of GM wheat in any way,” she said, but added the issue has to be handled with kid gloves.
“Our position is based on going forward in a very careful manner so we can be sure the benefits outweigh the risks.”
Fitzhenry noted the board’s most recent customer survey showed continued widespread opposition to GM products among its global consumers.
She added farmers surveyed by the board share that concern of customer acceptance.
Phillips said the coalition did not have direct feedback from overseas buyers in preparing its statement, but added the presence of the North American Millers Association in the coalition was an indication of changing attitudes.
Members of the coalition also include the U.S. National Association of Wheat Grower, U.S. Wheat Associates, the Grains Council of Australia, the Grain Growers Association (Aust.) and the Graziers Association of Western Australia.
One farm group not included is the National Farmers Union. President Stewart Wells said the majority of farmers in Canada are opposed to GM wheat for a number of reasons.
Those reasons include loss of markets, increased production costs, loss of ability to save and re-use seed, contamination of organic wheat by GM varieties and lack of research into long term impact on health and environment.
He added there is no evidence to support claims that GM wheat will automatically result in high yields, noting that the introduction of GM canola in 1996 did not have a significant impact on long term canola yield trends in Western Canada.
