Organic Winegrowing Reducing Marlborough’s Dangerous Chemical Use

/in ,

Organic wine growing in Marlborough is reducing significantly the amount of dangerous pesticides used in the region. With 1400 hectares either BioGro certified organic or in conversion, that equates to a full 1000 hectares of land no longer sprayed with herbicide.

“In September 2007, 70% of Marlborough vineyard area was sprayed with herbicide, anything from 100% blanket coverage to various width spray strips, and a range of dangerous pesticides used the rest of the year,” said Soil & Health-Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.(1)

“With 6% of Marlborough’s grape growing area under management to BioGro organic production rules, the Marlborough community and environment is spared drift from numerous very toxic sprays.”

“Organic standards are very strict about what chemicals can be used in organic production and both workers and neighbouring communities benefit from this.”

“The reduction of effectively 1000 continuous hectares from herbicide use, also benefits carbon sequestration and increases soil structure and soil life significantly.”

To 100 field day attendees, Organic Winegrowers New Zealand yesterday launched an Organic Focus Vineyard project in Marlborough. Over the next three years, the project will follow prominent vineyards in three wine regions as they are converted to organic production. As part of the project, Wither Hills are converting a portion of their Taylor River vineyard (Sauvignon Blanc & Pinot Noir) to certified organic management. (2)

Wither Hills already have 40 ha in conversion to BioGro certified organic production. Mission Estate in Hawkes Bay and Gibbston Valley Wines in Central Otago are the other focus vineyard participants, with Mission already reporting satisfaction with the organic regime, including economic gains, over conventional, from its first year pilot study.

“Conversion to organic viticulture in Marlborough follow early successes such as Seresin’s in Marlborough and a rapidly building international demand,” said Mr Browning.

“The theoretical economic convenience of harmful herbicides and pesticides has created areas such as Hawkes Bay and Marlborough as potential health risks, and anecdotal evidence points to increasing levels of cancers in both areas, so the very rapid shift to organics is good for communities and wine consumers.”

“Endocrine disruptors are also involved with the sprays and in Marlborough the main population areas of Blenheim, Renwick and Seddon are surrounded or downwind of the dominant spray zones.”

“The spraydrift problem extends nationwide with a slow uptake of technologies that can restrict spray drift or recapture and recycle unused airborne sprays. These however do not address the blanket herbicide use on land.”

“The organic options not only reduce frost damage, but improve soil health and carbon sequestration.”

“Herbicide use is proven to reduce vine health through protein disruption and increases susceptibility to pest and disease. It also reduces grape storage life, and natural flavours appear to be rounder without herbicide use.”

“Clean organic alternatives to massive herbicide and pesticide use are in keeping with New Zealand’s best brand, 100% Pure New Zealand, our clean green image, and Soil & Health’s vision of an Organic 2020.”

https://organicfocusvineyard.wordpress.com

Disclosure: Steffan Browning is also a BioGro board member and Green Party Candidate for the Kaikoura Electorate.

CONTACT:

The Soil & Health Association of NZ – Organic NZ
Spokesperson
Steffan Browning
021 725655
campaign@organicnz.org

Fonterra’s gutting of organic dairying next step to GE farms

/in , , ,

Fonterra has taken its next step towards genetically engineered pastures, with its announced scaling back of organic production by half, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.

Fonterra’s announcement yesterday of a 50% drop in support for organic dairy production, shows the dairy giant’s lack of support for good environmental practice and consumer health, and marks the next step to genetically engineered (GE) farmlands, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.(1)

“Fonterra has never really been committed to organic production, although aiming for 200 farms and a 140% increase in production from 2005. Just 200 farms was a very limited vision. Organic production across all New Zealand’s dairy herd should have been in any long term vision for clean green 100% Pure NZ,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Organic production has been identified as the main obstacle to introducing GE grasses and crops into New Zealand in a Ministry of Research Science and Technology (MoRST, now Science and Innovation) report written by Terri Dunahay, an international biotechnology policy specialist with the United States Department of Agriculture.” (2)

“Government also stopped real support for the organic sector following a briefing to the Agriculture Minister by Dunahay in 2009, yet Dunahay was duplicitous in every presentation I observed her. The misrepresentation of GE internationally, was appalling when Dunahay presented to Dairy NZ and the Institute of Public Administration New Zealand,” said Mr Browning.

“Dunahay and other United States lobbyists, along with New Zealand based pro-GE scientists fail to mention the significant GE contamination of non-GE farms, the loss of markets, the massive increase in herbicide use, the new resistant weeds and disease problems, higher seed and production costs, loss of biodiversity, or the human and animal health problems associated with genetic engineering (GE).”

Yesterday’s shock presentation to organic farmers in Taranaki and the Manawatu that their organically certified milk wasn’t wanted by Fonterra, because of reduced international demand, also included comment that organics caused “conventional” dairy production to be questioned as to its quality.

Best practice organics has improved soil structure and climate resilience, 43% more earthworm counts, 28% higher soil carbon sequestration, improved animal welfare, 33% less energy use, and a massive 58% reduction of nitrate leaching, yet is not valued well by Fonterra, because Fonterra’s conventional farming’s dirty environmental footprint, might be questioned more. (3)

“The KPMG Agribusiness Agenda 2011 released in June, highlighted the potential lost opportunity of high net worth customers globally by New Zealand if support for organic market and production research is allowed to languish.” (4,5)

Organic dairy exports from New Zealand grew 400% between 2005-2009. Organic product sales in the USA grew 7.7% compared with total food sales increase of less than 1% in 2010, yet the New Zealand government is allowing funding for Organics Aotearoa New Zealand (OANZ) to stop this June, and had already long stopped support for the Green Party initiated Organics Advisory Service that had assisted significant growth in organic certification.

“Fonterra missed retailing organic butter in New Zealand, and has failed to market its organic products well. Where was the Fonterra brands organic butter on New Zealand supermarket shelves? It wasn’t to be found. Blaming reduced markets when there has been continued growth in organic consumption internationally shows a lack of organic marketing commitment by Fonterra, not a lack of customers.”

“Fonterra and the government have spent millions of dollars on GE rye grass development, (6) while support has been stalled for the organic sector.”

“Most of Europe and Scandinavia and many other countries have targets for farm production conversion to organics, because the environmental and social benefits are well recognised, but in New Zealand there appears to be a blind adherence to short term economic benefit including GE, even when non-GE alternatives are proven.”

“When I asked on Friday, why the government had spent tens of millions on GE grasses, but had effectively stopped spending money on organics, Environment Minister Nick Smith told me, “We didn’t think there was any money in it,” “said Mr Browning.

“The planting of 336 GE pine trees by Scion and ArborGen at their Rotorua field trial site last week adds to the sadness of spirit New Zealand is suffering through short term financial aims by giant agribusiness, while it ignores the environmental and social health of Aotearoa New Zealand.”

Soil & Health wishes to express its support for the organic farmers whose livelihoods, dedication and dreams have been shaken by yesterday’s Fonterra announcement.

“Support by Federated Farmers to resist the drive for GE production in New Zealand, a requirement of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), could reignite Fonterra’s interest in organics. The New Zealand environment and consumers of the world will say thanks.”

Soil & Health has a motto of Healthy Soil – Healthy Food – Healthy People and a vision of an organic Aotearoa New Zealand.

References:

(1) http://www.fonterra.com/wps/wcm/connect/fonterracom/fonterra.com/Our+Bus…

(2) http://www.fulbright.org.nz/voices/axford/docs/axford2010_dunahay.pdf

(3) http://www.oanz.org.nz/openz/uploads/organic-report-2010-keyfacts.pdf

(4) Ref page 29: http://www.kpmg.com/NZ/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/agribus…

.

(5) http://www.sustainabilitynz.org/

CONTACT:

The Soil & Health Association of NZ – Organic NZ

Spokesperson
Steffan Browning
021 725655
campaign@organicnz.org

Celebration as killer pesticide Endosulfan ban goes global

/in , ,

Environmental and food safety organisations internationally are celebrating the global phase out of the DDT-like organochlorine pesticide, endosulfan. New Zealand NGOs, Soil & Health Association, Pesticide Action Network – Aotearoa New Zealand, and Safe Food Campaign along with the Green Party had for many years called for the banning of endosulfan, and a reassessment by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) in 2008 finished the legal use of endosulfan in New Zealand two years ago.

“New Zealand anti-pesticide campaigner Dr Meriel Watts’ part in the international action that has had endosulfan added to the Stockholm Convention’s list of banned substances, deserves recognition,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Dr Watts has put significant work in nationally and internationally to reduce exposure of humanity and the environment to these unnecessary pesticides, and will have improved the lives of very many people in the process.”

“Pesticide use in New Zealand continues unabated however, and for every neurotoxic, carcinogenic, and endocrine disrupting pesticide like endosulfan that is banned, New Zealand regulatory authorities such as ERMA, New Zealand Food Safety Authority, Food Standards Australia New Zealand, Regional and District Councils, with the support of the Ministers of Health, Food Safety, Environment, Conservation and Agriculture, continue to allow other new and old pesticides to soak our lands, waterways and food stuffs.”

“It took decades of advocacy, and threats to New Zealand export access, to have endosulfan removed from use, but resistance by commercial and regulatory agencies, with theoretical economic imperatives leading over precaution and safety warnings, will have damaged the lives of many. The same culture persists.”

“Where is Aotearoa New Zealand’s pesticide reduction policy? Where is Government support, for the NGO’s and advocates for a greener, safer environment and food chain? This year, Prime Minister John Key’s ‘Tourism Of New Zealand’ dropped its 100% Pure New Zealand strap-line, this needs to be revisited. Continual pesticide reduction should be part of a nuclear free, GE free, clean green 100% Pure Aotearoa New Zealand vision.”

Soil & Health – Organic NZ continues to advocate for a radical reduction in pesticide use in a clean green 100% Pure Aotearoa New Zealand in an Organic 2020.

KILLER PESTICIDE ENDOSULFAN TO BE PHASED OUT GLOBALLY

GENEVA: The nations of the world, gathered in Geneva this week, agreed to add endosulfan, an antiquated persistent insecticide, to the Stockholm Convention’s list of banned substances. Environmental health and justice organizations from around the world who have been working towards a ban welcomed the decision.

The use of endosulfan has severely impacted the people of Kerala, India, where its use on cashew plantations has left thousands suffering from birth defects, mental retardation, and cancer. “This is the moment we have been dreaming of,” says Jayan Chelaton from Thanal, a public interest research group based in Kerala. “The tears of the mothers of the endosulfan victims cannot be remedied, but it will be a relief to them that there will not be any more people exposed to this toxic insecticide. It is a good feeling for them. We are happy to note that this is also victory for poor farmers, as this proves people united from all over the world can get what they demand.”

Because of its persistence, bioaccumulation, and mobility, endosulfan, like DDT, travels on wind and ocean currents. It has travelled as far as the Arctic where it has contaminated the environment and the traditional foods of the people there. “We are pleased with the decision of the global community today to phase out this dangerous chemical that has contaminated our traditional foods in the Arctic. Our people are some of the most contaminated on the planet.” said Vi Waghiyi, a Yupik woman from St. Lawrence Island (Alaska) and the Environmental Health and Justice Program Director with Alaska Community Action on Toxics. “But until all manufacturing and uses of endosulfan are eliminated, this pesticide will continue to harm our peoples, so we urge all countries to rapidly implement safer alternatives and eliminate their last few uses of endosulfan.”

For most uses the ban will take effect in a year, but use on a short list of crop-pest combinations will be phased out over a six-year period. “With a plethora of alternatives already available, we’d have preferred to see no exemptions included in the decision.  But we were successful in restricting exemptions to specific combinations of crops and pests. This means that during the phase-out it can only be used in very specific situations,” said Karl Tupper, a staff scientist from Pesticide Action Network North America who attended the deliberations.

Endosulfan, a DDT-era pesticide, is one of the most toxic pesticides still in use today. Each year, it took the lives of dozens of African cotton farmers until recently being banned by most countries on the continent. Hundreds of farmers in the developing world still use it to commit suicide each year.

“The health of Indigenous Peoples around the world, including our Yaqui communities in Mexico, are directly and adversely impacted when these kinds of toxic chemicals are applied, usually without their knowledge or informed consent. This phase out is an important step forward for Indigenous Peoples adversely affected both at the source of application and in the Arctic where these toxics ultimately end up,” said Andrea Carmen, Executive Director of International Indian Treaty Council and coordinator of the Indigenous Peoples Global Caucus at the meeting.

According to Javier Souza, Coordinator of Pesticide Action Network Latin America, “This phase out of endosulfan provides an excellent opportunity for countries to implement non-chemical alternatives to pesticides and to strengthen and expand agroecological practices. National phase out efforts should be open to the participation of experts from academia, farmer organizations, and environmental groups with experience.”

Momentum for a global ban has been building for many years. “Endosulfan was first proposed for addition in the Convention in 2007. At that time about 50 countries had already banned it; today, more than 80 countries have banned it or announced phase-outs. NGOs have worked very hard to make this happen,” says Meriel Watts, senior science advisor, from Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific. “But today’s decision is really a tribute to all those farmers, communities, and activists across the planet who have suffered from endosulfan and fought for this day. It is especially a tribute to the thousands in the state of Kerala, India, whose health has suffered so terribly from endosulfan, to the inspirational leadership of Kerala Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, and to the many other people there who have all fought for their rights and for a global ban on endosulfan.”

“We are delighted with this decision as it means agricultural workers, Indigenous Peoples and communities across the globe will finally be protected from this poisonous pollutant,” says Dr Mariann Lloyd-Smith, CoChair of IPEN – International POP (Persistent Organic Phosphates) Elimination Network. “The UN’s own scientific body had clearly shown that endosulfan is a POP, despite the recent vocal claims by some. Endosulfan contaminates the Arctic food chain and Antarctic krill, poisons our farmers, and pollutes our breastmilk. It was clearly time for endosulfan to go and it now joins the same fate as old POP pesticides like dieldrin and heptachlor, banned once and for all. It is essential that all POP should be eliminated and this global ban will provide the much needed legal protection.”

Available for Interviews:

· Karl Tupper, Pesticide Action Network North America, karl@panna.org, +1 415-981-1771 (USA)

· Dr. Mariann Lloyd-Smith, International POPS Elimination Network, biomap@oztoxics.org; +61 41-362-1557 (Australia)

· Dr. Meriel Watts, Pesticide Action Network North America Asia and the Pacific, merielwatts@xtra.co.nz; +64 21-1807830. (New Zealand)

· Vi Waghiyi, Alaska Community Action on Toxics, vi@akaction.net, +1 907-222-7714 (USA)

· Jayakumar Chelaton, Thanal, jayakumar.c@gmail.com

· Andrea Carmen, International Indian Treaties Council, andrea@treatycouncil.org

Javier Souza, Red de Acción en Plaguicidas y sus Alternativas para América Latina, javierrapal@yahoo.com.ar

Soil & Health joins Federated Farmers opposing biosecurity plans

/in , ,

The Soil & Health Association of New Zealand has come out in support of Federated Farmers in criticism of government Biosecurity funding plans.

“Biosecurity risks are predominantly through importing and that is where the costs should lie,” said Soil & Health-Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Certainly exporters and industry have a lot to lose through biosecurity incursions, but biosecurity incursions affect everyone from consumers through to indigenous biodiversity”

“Reduction of biosecurity to only economic importance, with a user pays approach to just those economically affected misses the full environmental and social cost of many new organisms.”

“Biosecurity New Zealand needs better resourcing by Government to enable better border protection and if Government wants to insist on a purely economic base user pays system then charge the importers that incur the dominant risk.”

“Inspections need to be far more thorough without trust in overseas agencies.”

“Both Soil & Health and Federated Farmers members recognise the huge economic impact of biosecurity breaches. Government knows that there are risks to all primary production , biodiversity and tourism through poor biosecurity controls, and that importers are the primary risk.”

“Soil & Health promotes environmental sustainability and supports the validating of New Zealand’s clean green 100% Pure brand, including pesticide reduction. Less pests, less pesticides.”

Visiting Professor on GE sales mission misrepresents reality

/in , , ,

Agmardt and Pastoral Genomics Attacking Organics

Visiting Professor on GE sales mission misrepresents reality.

New Zealand biotech interests are attempting to attack New Zealand’s organic sector by funding University of California, Davis, Professor Pamela Ronald on a duplicitous public relations tour, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

Professor Ronald, has co-authored with her husband, a book that suggests that genetic engineering (GE) and organic production can co-exist, has been brought to New Zealand by Agricultural and Marketing Research and Development Trust (Agmardt) and Pastoral Genomics who are increasingly dominated by pro- GE interests.

“Pamela Ronald’s presentation at the Royal Society today misrepresented both the reality of GE and organics in the world and avoided the dangers of GE to New Zealand’s primary production and tourism branding and markets”, said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Suggesting that GE crops could be sustainable and fit within or alongside organic management systems is the ultimate untruth, yet that was Ronald’s key message.”

“Ronald’s suggestion that GE was needed to feed the world, flies in the face of the many reports showing the organic and biological GE free systems have significantly superior results exactly where the food is needed.”

“It is clear that the vested interests of the biotech and seed industries lodged in Agmardt and Pastoral Genomics do not mind misleading politicians, farmers and the New Zealand public to further their own interests.”

“Ronald has been discredited by the international organic community and fellow University of California academics, yet Agmardt and Pastoral Genomics have paid her to come to New Zealand.”

“Organic consumers worldwide want 100% GE free food regardless the acceptance of contamination by some governments overwhelmed by GE contamination.”

“Organic certification standards such as those of New Zealand’s BioGro have zero tolerance to GE seed, inputs or contamination and that is what consumers want.”

“New Zealand is well suited to maintain its GE free reputation in both organic and conventional exports as demand for GE free food is increasing internationally as the unsustainability of GE production and evidence of health risks from consumption of GE foods grows,” said Mr Browning.

“At yesterday’s Royal Society presentation, organic consumers, producers and certifiers were amazed at Ronald’s intentional mixing of the terminology of conventional breeding techniques and GE techniques to suggest they were essentially the same. Ronald also misrepresented the statistics in pesticide use in GE cropping internationally, focusing on just one insecticide equivalent.”

“Massive pesticide use is associated with GE production and infiltrating organics with GE plants, is neither needed nor wanted.”

“Ronald’s presentation totally avoided the significant failures of GE crops in many parts of the world, the collapse of rural communities, and emerging evidence of risks to health following independent animal feeding studies with GE foods.”

Ronald’s visit continues the pressure from the biotech industry and United States trade interests for New Zealand to relinquish its market advantage of being 100% free of GE crops, in a world increasingly contaminated by GE material.”

“United States seed interests dominate world production of genetic engineering and it is the seed that Ronald is so focused on getting into organics, “It is just a seed,” she disingenuously insisted.”

Ronald’s GE sales pitch follows a US Department of Agriculture international biotech policy specialist Terri Dunahay being hosted in the New Zealand’s science policy ministry (MoRST) and environmental regulator (ERMA), culminating in a 2010 report suggesting that resistance to GE contamination by the organic sector was a major impediment to GE forage plants being introduced into New Zealand pastures.

US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s Science & Technology advisor Nina Federoff visited early in 2010 hosted by MoRST with a similar misinformation pitch as Ronald’s, through Science Media, Listener magazine and key radio interviews. Wikileaks has shown the United States embassy here to be maintaining pressure on New Zealand to relax its regulations on GE.

Big US GE forestry and pharmaceutical interests are involved with GE field tests by AgResearch and the Forest Research Institute (Scion) and US GE seed interests currently have no market in New Zealand.

“Ronald is just the next misleading US sales rep attempting to infiltrate our clean green nuclear free, GE free, 100% Pure NZ reputation,” said Mr Browning.

“Considering the growth in demand for organic and genuinely sustainable, animal friendly and residue free foods that fit with New Zealand’s clean green 100% Pure market image, why would we do anything else?”

Soil & Health – Organic NZ and the New Zealand organic sector remains resolute in its opposition to genetic engineering in food and the environment.

AgResearch must stop its GE projects

/in , ,

AgResearch’s decision to stop cloning animals at its genetic engineering (GE) facility due to animal welfare concerns, should also mean an end to its cruel stem cell method of raising GE animals, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

“Supporting the call yesterday by the Green Party for a Parliamentary Inquiry into the ethics and animal welfare issues at AgResearch’s facilities,” Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning asked, “Do AgResearch and government policy and trade boffins think that stem cell derived GE animals will be any more acceptable to consumers in New Zealand or globally?”

“AgResearch’s own acknowledgement that the stem cell cloning replacement method was going to cause similar losses, should be the death knell on the bizarre experiments at AgResearch’s GE facilities.”

“The cloning technology was cruel and had a track record of very few live births, with resultant offspring prone to a variety of disabilities including arthritis, respiratory distress, deformities and ruptured ovaries, and now AgResearch still isn’t guaranteeing any improvement.”

Just a month before AgResearch stopped its 13 years of cloning experimentation, in September 2010, Soil & Health – Organic NZ had called for a stop to the cloning.

Soil & Health also wanted the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) to clarify the position New Zealand had been promoting internationally against labeling food from cloned animals, and for Fonterra to state unequivocally its opposition to cloning and genetic engineering of animals and pasture.

Following leakage of beef and possibly milk from cloned animals getting into the British food chain, the EU Parliament had last year called for new EU legislation to be developed to expressly prohibit foods from cloned animals and their descendents, with a moratorium on their sale in the meantime.
However NZFSA, representing New Zealand at Codex alimentarius meetings where international food standards and labeling rules are set, has been opposing labeling of food from cloned animals.

“In supporting AgResearch’s cruel genetically engineered (GE) animal cloning at Ruakura, and the international sales of the GE technology or its products, NZFSA has been taking a position that is contrary to New Zealanders and consumers world-wide,” said Mr Browning

“AgResearch was involved with the failed PPL Therapeutics’ farming at Whakamaru of thousands of cloned GE ‘Dolly’ type sheep which suffered respiratory and other defects, ahead of the company’s failure and the sheeps’ destruction in 2003. AgResearch continued the same misery at Ruakura with GE cows, and more recently GE goats and GE sheep had been approved by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA).”

AgResearch’s applied technologies group manager, Dr Jimmy Suttie, was quoted in May as saying he did not see the deaths as a “big deal”, and they were part of the learning process for scientists. In 2007, following a highly contentious USDA report on the safety of food from cloned animals, Dr Suttie said there was nothing to stop cloned animals entering the food chain, but it was not happening because of international consumer preference.

“That same international consumer preference prevails and all of Dr Suttie’s cruel experiments need to stop before New Zealand is recognised as the centre of bizarre GE animal experiments,” said Mr Browning.

“New Zealand has just two GE field trial experimental facilities operating, the one cruel GE animal one and one for risky GE pine trees at Rotorua. Now is the time to say no to all GE experiments in Aotearoa New Zealand’s environment and rebuild our clean green 100% Pure brand.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 where new technologies do not compromise genuine environmental sustainability but support biological and organic management systems that are animal friendly and do not use synthetic additives.

Country of Origin Labeling needs to follow ban on sow crates

/in , ,

The banning of sow crates before 2016 is great news considering the efforts by Soil & Health-Organic NZ, the Green Party, SAFE and other NGOs in calling for such a ban, but subsidising cruel operators during the phase out as indicated, is not fair on the organic and free range pork producers who have already been using more animal friendly methods of production, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.

“Rewarding recalcitrant animal abusers sends a message to other farming sectors that animal welfare changes need only come with government support,” said Soil & Health-Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Agriculture Minister David Carter has done well to broker a deal with the pork industry, but he could have also achieved a reward for all good farmers by implementing Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling and banning imports of meat that are produced to a lower standard than New Zealand.”

“SAFE has pointed out that there will still be potentially 15,000 sows putting up with barbaric  sow crates ahead of the ban’s enforcement, and there needs to be consumer labeling warning of pork products sourced from such processes, if there is going to be a speedy phase out.”

“Well done to the animal activists who have repeatedly brought examples of barbaric animal welfare to the public. Battery hens must be next.”

Soil & Health-Organic NZ has a vision of an Organic 2020 where best practice animal welfare is the norm. Organic farming has strict rules to ensure high animal welfare practices.

The new Animal Welfare Code of Practice for pigs is available at with the Sow Crate excerpt further below

http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/regs/animal-welfare/req/codes/pigs/…

Minimum Standard No. 11 – Managing Dry Sows
(a) Sows may only be confined in mating stalls for service for no longer than one week.
(b) Where sows and mated gilts are group housed, they must be managed to minimise the effects of aggression.
(c) Where sows and mated gilts are housed in dry sow stalls, they must be able to stand in their natural stance without contact with any side of the stall and be able to lie comfortably on their sides without disturbing neighbouring sows.
(d) Sows in stalls must have a dry, smooth, non-slip sleeping area.
(e) Between 3 December 2012 and 3 December 2015 mated sows and gilts must not be confined in dry sow stalls for more than four weeks after mating.
(f) After 3 December 2015 mated sows and gilts must not be confined in dry sow stalls after mating. If individually confined in a pen, sows must have sufficient space so that they can stand up, turn around without touching the walls, and lie comfortably in a natural position, and be provided with separate dunging, lying and eating areas.
(g) Individual pigs that are not coping well must be provided with alternative management.
(h) Pigs must not be restrained by tethering.

Plant & Food, Lincoln University, MAF and MoRST Risk Brand New Zealand

/in , , ,

Genetic engineering (GE) experiments by Plant & Food Research and Lincoln University need to be reconsidered following newly reported failures by government agencies in managing GE risks at Plant & Food’s Lincoln facilities, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

“The conflicts of interest by researchers and government agencies in GE management and compliance suggest the best way forward is to stop unnecessary experiments and governments’ continued attempt to introduce GE plants and animals into the New Zealand environment,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

Plant & Food Research’s containment glasshouse at Lincoln was the scene of a GE cress plant (Arabidopsis thaliana ) leak, discovered by a senior scientist, after extractor fan mesh was replaced. However the GE cress plants found growing outside the facility were purportedly by seed washed from the facility through cracks at floor level during a Lincoln University from visiting United States scientist’s experiments.

A Sunday Herald report has said papers released under the Official Information Act show that the scientists may have imported the initial GE cress seed illegally by not declaring its GE status and later blocked investigation inquiries. (1)

A Ministry of Agriculture (MAF) Enforcement Directorate Investigation and Offence Summary sourced by Soil & Health described several possibilities for how the GE cress may have leaked; some through lax maintenance or inadequate filters, and possible removal on clothing by personnel.

“MAF, although principal investigator, is conflicted in these investigations, as invariably its own MAF-Biosecurity NZ GE audit role is found to be wanting. This is further aggravated by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) and MAF allowing researchers to do their own experiment approvals and inspections,” said Mr Browning.

“MAF staff failed to properly monitor the GE brassica field trial the previous year, also at Lincoln, and also Scion’s Rotorua GE field trial before that. ERMA was also complicit in the cover up of Scion’s failing to correctly prune the GE trees to ensure no pollen was released.”

In a response to the Christchurch Press in April, MAF were reluctant to release information and then it was limited to the Enforcement Summary in June.

“Continued lack of transparency by agencies, and difficult levering to access reports through the Official Information Act, show a continued pro-GE push by government agencies reluctant to support the predictions of the NGOs and community who have consistently warned of GE contamination risks.”

“We warn of leaks and pollen escape. ERMA says conditions of consent will ensure no leak, yet consistently the experimenters fail. Ministry of Research Science and Technology (MoRST) is culpable too, with its biotech strategy convinced that GE is the way forward. MoRST with its policy role is letting down New Zealand by not keeping with a clean green 100% Pure vision.”

“MoRST has been active in promoting GE and has used United States Department of Agriculture staff to assist. Loyalty to New Zealand producers will be to promote science that supports New Zealand’s brand opportunity, not the commercial and strategic interests of the US corporations.”

“It seems symbolic that MoRST has a photo of GE cress illustrating its biotech page. Maybe the photo was from Lincoln.” (2)

“It could use an illustration of an organic pasture that sequesters carbon, has a full biologically active soil life that deals with nitrates naturally and supports animals that do not need rumen interventions. MoRST and MAF need to move to where their community and customers want them to be.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 where MoRST, MAF and the new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA-ex ERMA) will be co-operating transparently to promote science and production that will add value in an environmentally and economically risk free way.

NOTES
(1)  http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10662711
(2)  http://www.morst.govt.nz/current-work/biotechnology/
(3) The MAF Enforcement Directorate Investigation and Offence Summary is available on request.

New Zealand animal cloning needs to stop

/in , ,

New Zealand needs a ban on animal cloning, food from cloned animals, and a verification process for imported foods to ensure compliance for New Zealand consumers, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

Soil & Health also wants the New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) to clarify the position it has been promoting internationally against labelling food from cloned animals. And for Fonterra to state unequivocally its opposition to cloning and genetic engineering of animals and pasture.

Following a leakage of beef and possibly milk from cloned animals into the British food chain, the EU Parliament has called for new EU legislation to be developed, to expressly prohibit foods from cloned animals and their descendants, with a moratorium on their sale in the meantime.

However, NZFSA, representing New Zealand at Codex Alimentarius meetings where international food standards and labelling rules are set, has opposed labeling of food from cloned animals.

‘By supporting AgResearch’s cruel genetically engineered (GE) animal cloning at Ruakura, and the international sales of the GE technology or its products, NZFSA has taken a position that is contrary to New Zealanders and consumers worldwide,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“The technology is cruel and has a track record of very few live births, with resultant offspring prone to a variety of disabilities including arthritis, respiratory distress, deformities and ruptured ovaries.”

“AgResearch was involved with the failed PPL Therapeutics’ farming at Whakamaru of four thousand cloned GE ‘Dolly’ type sheep which suffered respiratory and other defects, ahead of the company’s failure and the sheeps’ destruction in 2003. AgResearch continues the same misery at Ruakura with GE cows, and new GE approvals by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) for goats and more sheep.”

AgResearch recently was found to have allowed calves to die from ruptured ovaries. AgResearch’s applied technologies group manager, Dr. Jimmy Suttie, was quoted in May as saying he did not see the deaths as a “big deal”, they were part of the learning process for scientists. In 2007, following a highly contentious USDA report on the safety of food from cloned animals, Dr. Suttie said there was nothing to stop cloned animals from entering the food chain, but it was not happening because of international consumer preference.

“That same international consumer preference prevails and Dr Suttie’s cruel experiments need to stop before New Zealand is recognised as the centre of cruel cloning,” said Mr Browning.

In 2007, Fonterra spokesman David Anderson said Fonterra did not use cloning or genetic engineering technology and was committed to not using it at this stage. Customer demand meant Fonterra had not looked at using such technologies, and “there is nothing in the wind”, he had said.

“However, Fonterra needs to be unequivocal about its position on cloning and genetic engineering if it wants to retain the advantages of trading under the clean green 100% Pure New Zealand brand,” said Mr Browning, “Fonterra is tied to genetically engineered pasture development through its science links and AgResearch, yet traditional breeding and greener pasture management can achieve improved value.”

“What is the position of Fonterra this week? That, ‘there is nothing in the wind’, doesn’t cut it. What is it to be?”

“GE rye grass and clover and cloned animals for supposed productivity, or a clean green naturally developed pasture feeding well bred and cared for animals supplying a valued product that consumers actually want. What does research tell you?”

“New Zealanders need to be sure our research institutes and leading companies such as Fonterra are sharing in the clean green 100% Pure brand, and government needs to be right there with them, sharing the Kiwi vision.”

“AgResearch and NZFSA, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ), and Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF), all have culpability in supporting experiments and trade in cloned animal products that are repugnant to most people.”

“New Zealand’s pro-cloned animal position internationally does not reflect what the customer wants and contradicts New Zealand’s clean green 100% Pure trading image.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 where new technologies do not compromise genuine environmental sustainability but support biological and organic management systems that are animal friendly and do not use synthetic additives.

Organic Dairy Farmers Don’t Abort Calves

/in , ,

Unlike the 200,000 cows callously induced to bring cow herds into milking at the same time, certified organic herds are never at risk of such practices according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

“Consumers of certified organic milk, cheese and yoghurt can feel confident that animal welfare considerations in organic standards do not allow induction,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“Organic production fits New Zealand’s clean green 100% Pure image in a way that government seems to forget. The Minister of Agriculture knows that New Zealand’s best value markets want products from environmentally sustainable and animal welfare friendly systems, and those markets are prepared to pay.”

TVNZ News highlighted that cows in conventionally farmed herds are permitted to be induced by injection to ensure they birth dead or alive calves months early so that milking can start earlier. Many are born dead and the rest killed.(1)

Although the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) acknowledged in its 2010 Animal Welfare (Dairy Cattle) Code of Welfare report that induction ‘has the potential to affect the welfare of both cow and calf adversely’ and states that it does not support induction, the Report is only a recommendation to the Minister of Agriculture who can ban the practice. (2)

“The Minister has the ability to raise animal welfare standards to match those in the organic standards and production rules of BioGro New Zealand, and AsureQuality,” said Mr Browning. (3)

“The Minister has the power to ‘clean and green’ animal welfare and New Zealand primary production very quickly if he can grasp the vision that most consumers and discerning export markets have.”

“Leaving it to industry to phase out inductions voluntarily is a cop out. The Minister needs to use his leadership ability on animal welfare just as he has on the ETS and water quality, because he knows what the best markets actually want and he knows what is right.”

“Organic production of dairy products doesn’t require the massive amounts of synthetic fertilizers that most conventional farms are using, nor do they have as high vet bills, but have healthier animals producing lower emissions and soils with higher climate tolerance and less leaching of nutrients.”

“Fully certified organic dairy farmers also earn a $1.05 premium on each kilogram of milk solids and customers are prepared to pay for it.” (4)

The New Zealand Organic Report – commissioned by OANZ and prepared by the University of Otago showed total sales of organic dairy products grew almost 400% in two years. The report also showed dairy farms have 43% more earthworms than their conventional neighbours, and higher levels of biodiversity in soils and waterways, with 58% less leachate headed towards waterways, and sequestering 28% more soil carbon than conventional farms. (5)

“It is time for change and the sooner the government starts setting targets for organic farm conversions the better for animals, consumers, farmers and exporters.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 where animal welfare is of the highest standard and environmentally sustainable organic production is the norm.

NOTES

Links accessed Aug. 2010
(1) http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/calls-calf-killing-practice-banned-3680389
(2) http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/regs/animal-welfare/req/codes/dairy-cattle/dairy-cattle-report.pdf
(3) http://www.biogro.co.nz/content/files/Module_5_Livestock.pdf
(4) http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/fonterra-eyes-massive-organic-growth-2014-123351
(5) http://www.oanz.org