Canadian wheat groups have not thrown their support behind a promising new genetically modified wheat proposal the same way their counterparts in the United States have, says a biotechnology promoter.
Earlier this year, U.S. Wheat Associates, the National Association of Wheat Growers and the Wheat Export Trade Education Committee – the three big players in the U.S. wheat industry – issued a joint declaration of support for the continued development of Syngenta’s fusarium tolerant wheat.
Syngenta had informed the groups that after Monsanto’s failed GM wheat project, it didn’t want to commit to another year of trials and put itself through the onerous process of seeking regulatory approval for the crop in the U.S. and Canada until it received such an assurance.
Read Also
Russian wheat exports start to pick up the pace
Russia has had a slow start for its 2025-26 wheat export program, but the pace is starting to pick up and that is a bearish factor for prices.
But while there is consensus south of the border, there has been no public outcry for or against the technology from Canadian wheat groups. Just silence, said Denise Dewar, executive director of plant biotechnology with CropLife Canada.
“What hasn’t happened, I guess, is what you’ve seen in the U.S. is to actually see these groups come out and say, ‘we want it,’ ” she said.
Dewar surmised the Canadian Wheat Board, the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association and the Grain Growers of Canada are facing different pressures than their U.S. counterparts.
Canada is far more dependent on export markets than the U.S., which makes GM wheat a touchier subject in this country.
“We are maybe in a bit of a different situation here from that perspective,” she said.
Judy Shaw, spokesperson for Syngenta Canada, said the company is not seeking a public demonstration of support north of the 49th parallel.
In fact, the Canadian branch of the company has been largely mum on the subject.
“We don’t really talk about it all that much publicly because it is so early and we don’t like to give people false hope on things.”
Shaw said although Syngenta achieved excellent results with its GM wheat in last year’s field trials, the crop remains a long way from commercialization.
“If everything works right, I don’t think one could see it being available before some time in the next decade,” she said.
Fusarium head blight has become a devastating disease for wheat growers worldwide. Experts peg the annual damage caused by fusarium at $1 billion US in North America alone.
Fusarium is found all over the globe and existing crop protection tools suppress rather than provide full control of the disease, which is why companies like Syngenta are devoting resources to find a solution.
“We’re looking at everything and I know the growers are looking for anything,” said Shaw.
But late last year the GM wheat aspect of that work was in jeopardy.
Darrell Hanavan, chair of the joint USW-NAWG biotechnology committee, told delegates attending the December 2005 North American Grain Congress that Syngenta was at a crossroads. He said the company was leery of proceeding with its expensive project without a public declaration of support from wheat groups. Syngenta didn’t want to go down the same road that Monsanto had with its Roundup Ready wheat project that was rejected by growers on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border.
Shortly after the grain congress, Syngenta got what it was looking for from U.S. grower groups.
Shaw said the company will proceed with field trials in 2006. She did not know whether those trials would occur on both sides of the border.
