The Canadian seed industry’s best practices guide for co-existence of organic and genetically modified alfalfa is scientifically indefensible, says a study by GM alfalfa opponents.
They lashed out last week after the Canadian Seed Trade Association heard an update on a co-existence plan that is a precursor to a likely application to register a GM alfalfa variety.
“The CSTA’s co-existence plan is an aggressive, harmful intrusion into the existing, well-functioning farming systems and markets that benefit from alfalfa use,” said a scathing report from the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network and the National Farmers Union.
Read Also
Geopolitics can change trade routes
WHISTLER, B.C. — Today’s geopolitical tensions could have dire long-term consequences, says the director of international policy at the University…
“Co-existence with GM alfalfa is not possible.”
The report argued that seed companies misunderstand or ignore the scientific evidence that volunteer alfalfa plants appearing in neigh-bouring fields is a regular occurrence and that careful equipment cleaning, early harvesting and diligence are not a guarantee that a GM variety will not spread.
It also said the “best practices” would impose an obligation on non-GM farmers to consult with their neighbours over cropping plans, take extra care to make sure volunteer plants are not in their fields and perhaps change cropping patterns to minimize risk.
It includes an “unrealistic” expectation that farmers always have the time or inclination to collaborate with neighbours and imposes cost and time burdens on non-GM farmers who will not benefit, said the study.
The CSTA co-existence plan, which was discussed at the association’s recent annual meeting in Quebec City, says the probability of inadvertent spread is low with proper best management practices.
However, the CBAN and NFU re-port disagreed.
“If even a single one of the proposed practices fails, contamination cannot be undone, flowers cannot be un-pollinated and GM alfalfa cannot be taken back,” it said.
“This is a very limited risk reduction plan, not a co-existence or containment plan.”
The GM trait developed by Mon-santo and promoted for commercialization by Forage Genetics International, both CSTA members, was approved by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency five years ago.
The next step, signaled by FGI, is to apply to register a variety.
The industry has indicated that the variety will be commercialized only in Eastern Canada in areas where alfalfa is produced for hay and not sold as feed to overseas markets where GMOs can stop trade.
Before the CSTA’s annual meeting in July, then-chair Stephen Denys from Pride Seeds in Chatham, Ont., disputed the protesters’ claim that cross-contamination risk cannot be controlled or eliminated.
He said the evidence from the United States, where GM alfalfa has been marketed for years, suggests otherwise.
Prudent management practices are required, including harvesting before the GM variety fully flowers and creating separate growing areas.
“We heard from Washington state producers who grow both on their farm,” he said.
“They’ve adjusted their practices because they sell certified organic as well and they haven’t had any issues at all.”
