Gerard Oosterhuis’ canola crop was coming up nicely April 26 when he loaded up his sprayer and doused the entire 93 acres with a deadly shot of 2,4-D.
“It was kind of a shock to have to do it,” said the Bow Island, Alta. farmer. “I put it in early ’cause we get so darn hot in southern Alberta this time of year so the crop was up and actively growing.”
Oosterhuis was among a handful of unlucky farmers who planted two varieties of genetically altered canola pulled from the shelves this spring for containing the wrong gene.
Read Also
Storm dynamics and extreme rainfall
Besides moisture, instability and orographic lift, the next biggest factor that contributes to heavy or extreme rainfall is storm dynamics.
Sixty thousand bags of seed, enough to plant 600,000 acres, were taken out of circulation as part of the massive recall of Limagrain’s LG 3315 and LG 3295.
Oosterhuis re-seeded the acres to spring wheat, and says he received fair compensation from Monsanto, the company that owns the gene. A non-disclosure clause prevents him from saying how much the company gave him for his troubles.
“I had to go in and start over again, so you’ve lost some moisture and you’ve lost valuable time ’cause it’s quite a critical month to get the crop under the ground,” he said.
“They took everything into account and I think I was treated very fairly.”
Three months later, Oosterhuis said the experience hasn’t soured him from planting genetically changed canola again next year.
“I believe this was a glitch. Just like anything else I think what happened is a step back, but I think it is good technology.”
That’s the sort of attitude Ray Mowling likes to hear from farmers.
Bad for reputation
The Monsanto spokesperson said the recall posed a considerable threat to the company’s reputation.
“There was a lot of seed taken out of the market and the demand for Roundup Ready canola was high,” Mowling said.
“When you have disappointed growers, which we’ve got, that reflects on us.”
Early results from an investigation into how the mix-up occurred point to a problem in the pedigree seed production process.
“The gene was correctly in those varieties, but what happened is that the one variety, or the gene construct that we decided to work on and got approval on, was not the one that was put into production.”
The recall has been difficult, but Mowling said it shows the system works whereby both the government and private sector share the responsibility for monitoring new plant varieties.
“At the end of the day there’s an environmental impact but there’s also an implication to a seed company and our company who have lost sales. That is a pretty significant onus to make sure that these kinds of things don’t happen,” he said.
The federal government body that suspended the varieties after the unregistered gene was discovered is helping the companies find ways to avoid these mistakes in the future.
“As with any regulatory system you’ve got to make sure the company has a plan, so we’ve got to look into that with this company,” said Margaret Kenny, associate director biotechnology strategies for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
First in several years
This was the first large-scale suspension since the federal agriculture branch began regulating genetically altered plants nearly a decade ago.
Mowling said it is too early to say whether the varieties will be available next year.
