ERMA swallowed genetic bull from AgResearch

/in , , ,

ERMA has swallowed a lot of genetic bull from AgResearch. GE Trials Must Stop Immediately!

A Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety (INBI) report published yesterday shows that AgResearch may have intentionally misled the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) and allowed risky genetic contamination in the Waikato Region, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ. (1)

Because of the biosafety risk of significant adverse effects to people or the environment, AgResearch was required by ERMA to monitor soil microorganisms for the uptake of transgenes by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) at the offal pits where genetically engineered (GE) cattle were disposed. (2)

“If AgResearch detected HGT, an immediate stop to genetic engineering and the disposal of cattle was required, but AgResearch has sampled in such a way as to avoid any real likelihood of that happening,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.(3)

The INBI report (page 4) states, “The Authority allowed AgResearch to design, conduct and supervise the monitoring of HGT, and this latitude created a potential conflict of interest for AgResearch when set against its funding criteria and overall goal of delivering commercially applicable research results from the development of GM bovine.”

“By using research in such a way to avoid finding the result that they were required to, AgResearch have cheated ERMA and New Zealand, and their genetically engineered (GE) animal trials should be halted immediately,” said Mr Browning.

“ERMA has aggravated the situation by failing to analyse or even sight some AgResearch reports, and accepted AgResearch statements of safety, and then determining that new approvals would not need HGT monitoring.”

“We have consistently called for independence of risk analysis and research monitoring. This situation shows yet again that GE field trial environmental safety monitoring in New Zealand is corrupted.”

Five years of AgResearch monitoring reports, released to GE Free New Zealand under the Official Information Act, have been reviewed by the Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety (INBI) at the University of Canterbury. Following peer review by international experts the INBI report has been published in the Journal of Organic Systems.

“AgResearch has not only breached its approval conditions by not testing as required, but continues to spread  effluent including milk, blood and foetal tissue from GE animals onto its pastures, which are frequently flooded and drain through adjacent farmland, waterways and under Hamilton to the Waikato River.” (4)

“Is the Waikato to be the next site of a new environmental disaster?”

“The INBI Report states that HGT includes the movements of gene vectors such as plasmids, viruses and transposable elements that are observed in both prokaryotes (e.g. bacteria) and eukaryotes (e.g., animals, plants and fungi), however AgResearch has effectively avoided any chance of finding this potentially risky movement and ERMA has allowed it,” said Mr Browning.

“The INBI report states, “By design of experiments, AgResearch ignored up to an estimated 99.9% of bacteria and all other kinds of microbes.””

“Not only was the sample selection incredibly small but sampling was nearly always taken a considerable distance away from where HGT would be best sampled. The INBI report (page 13) graphically portrays the avoidance of sampling where HGT may occur.”(5,6)

“The HGT science undertaken by AgResearch, a leading Crown Research Agency, is a national disgrace and follows breaches at all other CRI GE field tests in recent years.”

“This field trial must stop immediately. The risks of new genetic material leaking into the wider environment is too high and because AgResearch have lapsed professionally to such a degree, while cruelly experimenting with animals unnecessarily, and using considerable amounts of tax-payers money to try and produce pharmaceutical products that are already being produced in a much safer manner.”

Soil & Health – Organic NZ is grateful for the diligence of GE Free NZ in identifying the breach and applying to ERMA for a reassessment of the AgResearch approval, and commends Professor Jack Heinemann and the INBI team in producing such a robust report, and for the Journal of Organic Systems for its publication of independent research of this calibre.

References and diagrams.

(1)    http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/Vol_6(1)/pdf/6(1)-Heinemann-pp3-19..pdf

http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/Vol_6(1)/index.html

EVALUATION OF HORIZONTAL GENE TRANSFER MONITORING EXPERIMENTS CONDUCTED IN NEW ZEALAND BETWEEN 2004 AND 2009. Jack A. Heinemann1,2*, Brigitta Kurenbach1,2 and Nikki Bleyendaal1  1Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety and the School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch New Zealand  2GenØk – Centre for Biosafety, Tromsø, Norway.  Corresponding author. Phone +64 3 364 2500 email jack.heinemann@canterbury.ac.nz  03 3642926   021 0239 7321

(2)    http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/Documents/GMD02028-decision.pdf  “There are potentially non-negligible risks to the environment that are not related to the ability of the cattle to escape. These risks include unintended insertion of viral cell receptors and creation of new viral reservoirs, and adverse effects arising as a result of HGT” (p. 47 ERMANZ, 2002, emphasis added). …

“significant uncertainty as to the magnitude and likelihood of the adverse effect arising” (p. 21 ERMANZ 2002).  …

“Micro-organisms shall be tested for the presence of the introduced genetic modifications at the disposal sites. If HGT is detected, genetic modification and disposal of cattle shall be immediately halted” (p. 58 ERMANZ, 2002). …

INBI Report -Journal of Organic Systems page 4 ; The Authority concluded that “[w]ith these controls in place, the combined non-negligible risks referred to above are considered to be low, even after taking account of uncertainty” (p. 48 ERMANZ, 2002). The Authority directly tied monitoring of soil microorganisms to its risk assessment, and encouraged monitoring to be “as extensive as possible” (p. 21 ERMANZ, 2002), saying of many additional controls that “[i]n general, these restrictions are aimed at removing classes of risk associated with HGT, viral and prion diseases, and antibiotic resistance” (p. 46 ERMANZ, 2002).

(3)    2. “Micro-organisms shall be tested for the presence of the introduced genetic modifications at the disposal sites. If HGT is detected, genetic modification and disposal of cattle shall be immediately halted” (p. 58 ERMANZ, 2002).

(4)    Attached photographs of offal pits, flooding, drains and drainage sump. All photographs available at a higher resolution. Photographs of GE cattle and goats also available.

(5)    From the INBI Report – Journal of Organic Systems page 13. Therefore, for all but one sampling exercise, the soil was a minimum of 1.7 m from contact with the microbes that would have been in contact with carcasses (Table 1). Because of compensation for subsidence and because AgResearch may have buried the carcasses much deeper, the samples could have been up to 5.8 m from the soil layer in first contact with carcasses11. If the average soil bacterium is about 1 µm (1 one millionth of a metre) in diameter, within the time between filling the pit and sampling, a recombinant bacterium would have to migrate a minimum distance 1.7 million times its size in a dry pit, or the gene would have to transfer a minimum of 1.7 million times, against gravity directly toward the surface in order to have the potential to be detected.

(6)    From the IMBI Report – Journal of Organic Systems Figure 2. Sampling depth and effect on experimental findings.

(A) AgResearch sampled soil from offal pits (cylinders in figure) at varying distances from the surface (depth, in metres). The reports did not specify the how close the carcasses came to the surface in the actual pits sampled. The carcasses may have been between 5.8 and 2 m from the surface (they had to be a minimum of 2 m deep to comply with ERMANZ control 1.4). There was no indication of whether any soil sampled was in contact with the carcasses, but it is possible that it was for samples taken in 2004. Depth and year at which samples were taken are shown as black bars.

(B) Soil (grey) subsidence in the pits over time was compensated through the addition of fresh soil (dark grey). The reports made no mention of whether soil was added to pits prior to sampling. Since subsistence takes time, samples taken before the addition of fresh soil to the pits were in most years both likely to have been well above the interface with carcasses (which were about a minimum of 1.7 m lower than sample depth) and to have provided too little time for the appearance of a target population of detectable size. Samples taken after the pits were topped up would have been in fresh soil never in contact with the carcasses.  AgResearch reports a variety of sampling depths. But only in the 2004 report was sampling beyond 30 cm, and in the 2009a report, sampling was to the depth of only 15 cm
(Figure 2A).

Can Ngai Tahu Change Agria- New Hope- PGG Wrightsons Genetic Engineering Direction?

/in , ,

A Ngai Tahu Holdings influence into Agria-New Hope- PGG Wrightson marks the opportunity for a change in direction from PGG Wrightson’s intent on being a global leader in genetically engineered pasture seed, according to Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

Ngai Tahu Holdings is quoted as “working on the development of an environmentally sustainable rural business model that reflects the values of the Ngai Tahu culture operating under the strictest of environmental practices and philosophies”.(1)

“Genetic engineering  (GE) field trials are considered tapu by Maori near some field trial sites, so the question must be;  What will be the status of the vast hectares of New Zealand pasture, should PGG Wrightson and Fonterra have their GE way?” asked Steffan Browning, Soil & Health-Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.(2)

“A description of Ngai Tahu Holdings as having “entrepreneurial courage” in the new venture will be shown if they can influence the PGG Wrightson Board, to drop its intent on introducing GE rye grass to Aotearoa New Zealand’s pastures. (3)

“Agria’s interest in PGG Wrightson lies in the lucrative seed division which has its sights on global dominance in GE pastures through the intellectual property it has control of, for high sugar  and low lignin GE pasture grasses.”(4)

PGG Wrightson GE rye grass seed now in overseas field trials, is intended to be released globally within 2 years, and is in part behind the continual lobbying by the United States Embassy and its pro-GE advocates such as Pamela Ronald and Terri Dunahay, coming to New Zealand, some funded by Pastoral Genomics and AGMARDT, both of whom are closely involved with Wrightson and Fonterra. (5)

The Chief Scientist of ViaLactia, part of biotech consortium Pastoral Genomics, and a fully owned subsidiary of Fonterra, has said his goal is to have the GE rye grass that he is developing throughout New Zealand pastures.

AGMARDT also funded the heavily criticised report by Otago University’s John Knight that suggested tourists would not be significantly deterred from visiting New Zealand if nuclear power, GE forages and more intensive farming was introduced. (6)

“Following Fukushima, just how untrue could that be? Corrupt polling does not make GE desirable. Consumers worldwide are increasingly treating genetic engineered food with similar disdain to nuclear power, as evidence of harm to health, the environment and rural communities increases,” said Mr Browning.

“The USA interest is the breaking of the New Zealand public’s resistance to GE, so that their own Monsanto and Pioneer GE seeds will have entry for the New Zealand corn-maize markets.”

“PGG Wrightson owned South American seed distribution companies will already be familiar with the GE strains, and PGG Wrightson has  seen the  “Seeds opportunity in Brazil represents a strategic growth opportunity”  in part  because of Brazil’s “ Positive attitude towards GM crops”.”(4)

“Agria, New Hope and PGG Wrightson are all involved with GE crops already, so the challenge to Ngai Tahu, if it wants to pursue entrepreneurial development with multinational pro-GE companies with major global GE crop proposals, is, how does it keep its rohe clean and “operating an environmentally sustainable rural business model that reflects the values of the Ngai Tahu culture operating under the strictest of environmental practices and philosophies”.””

“Kia kaha Ngai Tahu, as communities and farmers are finding throughout the world, there is no such thing as co-existence between GE and non-GE crops, and GE crops are not sustainable under any measure. The high sugar GE grass is unnecessary, and  there exists an equivalent developed without GE.” (7)

“New Zealand has much more opportunity staying GE Free and restoring its 100% Pure Aotearoa New Zealand vision rather than going down a multinational owned genetically engineered agricultural path. We will resist.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 which it would like to share with Ngai Tahu to build resilience, self reliance and a healthy, nutritious and secure food supply for Aotearoa New Zealand.

NOTES:

(1)  http://news.tangatawhenua.com/archives/11411

(2)  P17 Ngati Tuteata in the ERMA hearing for Scion’s GE pine trees, stated that the land would be tapu until something would be worked out to bring a state of noa, free from tapu, at the end of the field trials.  How could a tapu of horizontal gene transfer become noa? Only through acceptance of the change, but Ngati Tuteata have agreed with tapu without knowledge of the technology.  http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/Documents/ERMA200479-decision.pdf

(3)  http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10720227

(4)  www.pggwrightson.co.nz/…/Seeds%20Presentation_Overview%20of%20AgriTech…

(5)  http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1012/S00171/wikileak-das-reed-engages-on-tpp-un-env-fiji-apec.htm 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/03/wikileaks-us-eu-gm-crops
(SBU) When asked what the top local impediments will be to concluding an agreement, Sinclair noted a number of areas sensitive to New Zealand. It is “no secret” that Monsanto does not like New Zealand’s genetically modified organism (GMO) regulations, Sinclair said.

(6)  http://www.organicnz.org/soil-and-health-press/1253/dirty-tricks-campaign-to-get-genetic-engineering-into-the-new-zealand-landscape/

(7)  http://www.germinalseeds.co.nz/news.aspx

(8)  Agria expects to sell GE seed in China P 13, http://www.littleurl.net/229dfd

Scion smoke signals warn of imminent GE tree planting

/in , ,

Clouds of smoke from a poorly maintained tractor at Crown Research Agency Scion’s genetically engineered (GE) tree field test site last week signals the imminent planting of government supported, but environmentally and economically risky, GE pine trees at Rotorua, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ. (1)

Green Drinks Rotorua is hosting a public meeting in Rotorua on April 28 that will provide opportunity for Dr Elvira Dommisse, Soil & Health, GE Free Northland, and GE Free NZ, to provide information on the risks of Scion and its United States partner ArborGen’s involvement in GE trees. Scion has been involved with numerous pro-GE trees public relations exercises in the past. The public meeting is the opportunity for the independent scientific and environmentalist viewpoint to be expressed in Rotorua. (2)

“The effective fumigation of the site with diesel fumes, while preparing the soil for further GE contamination, is exactly what other communities are saying they don’t want,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

Whangarei District Councillors voted unanimously on April 13, to reject the outdoor use of genetically engineered (GE) crops and animals in the Whangarei District, and will now actively seek to undertake a collaborative plan change with all Northland councils and Auckland Council to keep GMOs out of the wider region. (3)

“Whangarei has clearly said they do not want risky technology. Public submissions to Rotorua’s Environment Bay of Plenty’s Regional Policy Statement include similar preferences.”

A new approval by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) in December 2010 for the planting of thousands of GE pine trees in batches at Rotorua over 25 years by Scion has allowed the enlarging of a previous GE pine tree test site to 4 ha. (4)

“Scion’s impending planting cannot be trusted, to not contaminate the Rotorua district with GE pine pollen in future years, if past management and duplicitous public relations communications from Scion, combined with ERMA’s failure to assess risk independently, is anything to go by,” said Mr Browning.

In January 2008 Soil & Health brought public attention to consent breaches by Scion. Following an investigation into the cutting down of 19 experimental GE trees by protestors, and Scion’s management failures, Scion removed the remaining 50 GE trees in June 2010, just  5 years into a potential 22 year experiment, calling that experiment a success.

MAF-Biosecurity NZ (MAF-BNZ) had failed to monitor the Scion GE field test site well, allowing animals to get past the security fence, for important pruning not to happen, for prunings to be mown by a tractor mower that was not cleaned, and pollen structures to form in the open on stressed GE tree seedlings. Independent scientists also challenged the quality of the Scion research.

“ERMA has approved some non-GE trees to release pollen in the upcoming GE experiments and is relying on the integrity of Scion, and its partner ArborGen, to not confuse GE trees and the non-GE experimental control trees producing pollen. However, Scion, ERMA, and MAF-BNZ, who is to monitor the experiments, have together previously allowed noncompliance by Scion to go unchecked even when pollen release was a risk.”

“ArborGen has said it wants to be the Monsanto of the tree world and evidence prepared for the application by Scion initially suggested pine pollen was only a risk for 300metres, although available research stated, “… viable pine pollen grains were captured at an altitude of 610 m.” and “GM pine plantings thus have a potential to disperse viable pollen at least 41 km from the source.”” (5)

“Pollen spread by Scion’s multi-million dollar GE tree partner ArborGen is the basis for legal action in the United States, where ArborGen is protesting that restrictions on GE tree field trials there will mean they may have to cut down existing GE trial trees that are already flowering. They now are pushing for GE forestry in New Zealand.”

The government has put $10.8 million in science funding into the Rotorua project and, with pro-GE forestry interests, actively lobbies Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and international forums such as the Convention of Biological Diversity and the World Trade Organisation along with the USA, for acceptance of GE forestry. Government’s Tourism New Zealand announced the phase out of the 100% Pure New Zealand brand in January.

The enlarged GE test site was being prepared for Scion and its USA partner ArborGen’s experiments in June 2010 before the application for approximately 4000GE pine trees was lodged with ERMA.

In response to Soil & Health’s 12 July media release suggesting that Scion had illegal prior approval from ERMA for the coming application justifying thousands of dollars of earthworks, Scion publicly denied that the earthworks were for a GE field test site, but formally applied a week later to ERMA. Public notification followed in August, with the ERMA hearing following in November 2010 at Rotorua. The decision was announced in December 2010.

“Regardless of the denial that the earthworks were for GE trees, the new external security fence was actually constructed by the time of the November ERMA hearing. This made the hearing a farce and no submitter was in doubt of what the decision would be. ERMA had effectively ticked the approval even before the application was officially received in July 2010.”(6)

“Poor risk analysis of GE plantings by ERMA, and poor liability provisions in the event of wider GE contamination, means that councils must add strong precautionary controls to district and regional plans.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 with no genetically engineered organisms in the Aotearoa New Zealand environment with the 100% Pure New Zealand brand restored.

NOTES:
(1)   Photographs available of machinery within the Scion GE tree test site April 14. Higher resolution available.
(2)   ‘Risks of GE trees and what to do instead’, 5 pm social – refreshments available, meeting 6 pm, 28 April, Blue Baths, Government Gardens, Rotorua.

(3)

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1104/S00219/council-moves-to-protect-its-community-from-gm-organisms.htm

(4)   http://www.ermanz.govt.nz/Documents/ERMA200479-decision.pdf

(5)   http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/content/short/ajb.0900255v1

(6)    Scion’s misleading responses to public concerns.

http://www.scionresearch.com/research/forest-science/tree-improvement/molecular-breeding/genetic-modification/fiction-or-fact

Government must separate GE foods in NZ stores

/in , ,

New Zealand’s Minister of Consumer Affairs John Boscawen, and Minister for Food Safety Kate Wilkinson, need to follow the Cypriot Parliament’s lead and give New Zealand consumers the choice of whether to eat genetically engineered (GE) foods or not, especially as a new report casts doubt on GE food safety, according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ.

The Cypriot Parliament has on Thursday passed a bill that will have genetically engineered (GE) foods placed on separate shelves to non-GE foods, and last month a French report showed weaknesses in GE food safety evaluation, and pointed to possible kidney, liver and reproductive health concerns. (1,2)

“Democracy, despite pressure from the USA, has led to the people of Cyprus getting the type of consumer choice that New Zealanders should be able to expect,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“GE foods, of which New Zealand allows approxiamately70 different GE lines, spread through numerous processed products, must now be displayed on separate shelves in supermarkets and shops in Cyprus, with strong fines for non-compliance.”

“GE foods and those with GE ingrediants, will need prominent signage in three different languages. The Cypriots are serious.”

Originally mooted in 2005, Cyprus was subject to US embassy pressure saying that such a Bill would be “like a poke in the eye to the US” and likely to damage US-Cyprus relations. However the Bill was passed by unanimous vote, regardless of industry and US wishes.”(3)

Wikileaks has shown that the USA has been exerting pressure on numerous countries, including New Zealand to relax regulatory conditions and allow more GE foods and crops. The USA is the world’s leading developer and producer of GE products and has been part of a major public relations push in New Zealand to soften public resistance to GE.

“Soil & Health – Organic NZ reported last year that there were 64 plus GE food lines allowed by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) into the New Zealand food supply, consisting of GE corn, soya, alfalfa, potatoes, canola, cotton, sugar beet and rice, and numerous GE processing aids.  This has increased to approximately seventy with several applications in process at any one time,” said Mr Browning. (4)

“FSANZ has yet to turn a GE food application down despite growing concern over GE food safety and flimsy food safety studies. Independent studies show very real risks but the same regulators that took decades to ban endosulfan continue to protect trade interests ahead of consumers.”

“The latest Seralini report uses available data to show that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is not testing adequately for health risks from GE foods. Independent research has previously shown organ, hormone and reproductive changes in animal GE feeding studies.”

Soil & Health – Organic NZ has an Organic 2020 vision similar to the Cypriot people of a GE Free country with clear choice of what is consumed.

———-

Notes

(1)   http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/separate-shelves-gm-foods-now-law/2011…

http://www.gmwatch.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1304…

(2)   http://www.enveurope.com/content/23/1/10/

(3)   http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/biotechWeb.pdf

(4)   http://www.organicnz.org/soil-and-health-press/ge-food-ingredients/

(5)   Seralini et al have conducted studies showing organ damage in rats fed GE food. The latest report is using the material including industry funded studies and shows the food safety authority is not adequately testing GE foods. Extract from latest French report (2): The 90-day-long tests are insufficient to evaluate chronic toxicity, and the signs highlighted in the kidneys and livers could be the onset of chronic diseases. However, no minimal length for the tests is yet obligatory for any of the GMOs cultivated on a large scale, and this is socially unacceptable in terms of consumer health protection. We are suggesting that the studies should be improved and prolonged, as well as being made compulsory, and that the sexual hormones should be assessed too, and moreover, reproductive and multigenerational studies ought to be conducted too.

Dirty tricks campaign to get genetic engineering into the New Zealand landscape

/in , ,

A dirty tricks campaign is under way to get public and government acceptance of genetically engineered (GE) crops into New Zealand farming systems, according to the Soil & Health Association of New Zealand.

The release on Friday by Otago University’s Associate Professor John Knight, of an Agmardt funded report on the attitude of tourists to scenarios of nuclear power and GE crops was incomplete and constructed to get the result that Agmardt and United States foreign policy wanted, says Soil & Health. (1)

The report failed to disclose the results of significant questions around the 100% Pure New Zealand brand, or what trust in New Zealand would be, should the Government allow nuclear power, allow factory farming, close GE field trials, demand GE labelling and for biotech companies to be liable for GE damage. The report was a mix of selected data and opinion by the author, who is closely linked to the biotech industry.

“Agmardt and Pastoral Genomics have only just hosted the internationally discredited, University of California Professor, Pamela Ronald, for a public
relations tour of New Zealand. Ronald intentionally misrepresented organic systems and GE as potentially coexisting,” said Soil & Health-Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning. (2)

“Both Knight’s report and Ronald’s presentations and responses to media are extremely misleading and part of a pro-GE strategy outlined in the recommendations by the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) international GE  policy specialist Terri Dunahay following her time in New Zealand government agencies last year.” (3)

“Wikileaks has shown the United States embassy pressure on the New Zealand government to embrace GE, and now Fonterra and PGG Wrightson’s associates, Agmardt and Pastoral Genomics, are ramping up the public relations communications in New Zealand in an effort to tick Dunahay’s recommendation boxes and get GE rye grass and clover into New Zealand’s pastures.” (4,5,6)

“Monsanto’s GE crops, and Scion and ArboGen’s GE pines, would quickly follow any introduction of GE pastures,” said Mr Browning.

“Unfortunately the pro-GE PR is neither accurate nor balanced and fails to include the benefits of remaining both nuclear free and GE free, or the costs to New Zealand’s current primary production being able to declare its produce as free from GE contamination.”

“Associate Professor Knight needs to make available the latest raw research data for independent analysis.”

“Knight’s Agmardt funded report fails to address the opportunities to tourism by remaining GE free. Even accepting Knight’s biased research, the approximately 9 % of tourists, who said that they would stop visiting New Zealand if GE was introduced, are very valuable to a tourist industry currently suffering from decline in tourist numbers.”

“Knight failed to consider the effects of  the 9% drop in tourism, and suggested that ” Introduction of drought-tolerant GM pasture into New Zealand would seem highly unlikely to have a damaging impact on New Zealand’s ‘clean green’ image for either exports of food products or for tourism.”

“A well facilitated public debate between GE protagonists, and Soil & Health-Organic NZ and GE Free NZ representatives is urgently needed.”

Soil & Health has a vision of an Organic 2020 where Aotearoa New Zealand remains Nuclear Free, GE Free, Factory Farm Free, and is following a path towards organic genuinely sustainable production and conservation.

(1) http://www.otago.ac.nz/news/news/otago017378.html  Please contact Steffan Browning for a copy of the full report. The full report is also available on request from Otago University, although the raw data does not appear to be available.
NOTES:
(1) http://www.otago.ac.nz/news/news/otago017378.html Please contact Steffan Browning for a copy of the full report. The full report is also available on request from Otago University, although the raw data does not appear to be available.
(2) http://www.organicnz.org/soil-and-health-press/mission-misrepresents-reality/
(3) http://www.fulbright.org.nz/voices/axford/2010_dunahay.html
(4) http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1012/S00171/wikileak-das-reed-engages-on-tpp-un-env-fiji-apec.htm
(5) http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/03/wikileaks-us-eu-gm-crops
(6) http://www.organicnz.org/soil-and-health-press/pure-newzealand/

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.

Plant & Food Research shifted GE soil illegally?

/in , , ,

Where has Plant & Food Research taken the contaminated soil excavated from its botched genetically engineered brassicas  Lincoln field trial site, and why weren’t stakeholders kept informed of changes to the compliance controls, the Soil & Health Association of NZ is asking.(1,2)

In December 2008 Soil & Health – Organic NZ discovered an illegally flowering  genetically engineered (GE) kale plant (3) and several other flowering brassicas that had set seed pods among weeds at the Lincoln field trial site of Crown Research Institute Plant & Food Research. (4,5,6,7)

The field trial was immediately closed and following an intensive investigation that revealed other GE flowering events, strict controls were imposed for at least 5 years to limit the spread of any GE material from the site.

“Plant & Food have now extended the contamination by removing the heavily herbicide-sprayed and GE contaminated soil from the trial site late last year in an effort to reduce compliance efforts,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“This soil removal appears to be illegal under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (HSNO), although Plant & Food had expressed a commitment to Soil & Health – Organic NZ to meeting whatever new controls were imposed, following my discovery of the flowering GE kale in 2008.”

“Plant & Food needs to make public the details of where the soil is, and what exact GE constructs were used in the original trial so that independent testing of crops in the Lincoln area can occur.”

Brassica species include vegetable plants such as cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, kale, mustard, radish, turnip, rocket, rape, kohlrabi, brussels sprouts, mizuna and several weeds. Brassicas are able to cross easily between species and Plant & Food grew several GE and non GE brassica species at the site where a weed brassica, wild turnip, was also reported.

Although  Plant & Food have removed  contaminated soil to more than 250mm depth, Soil & Health – Organic NZ has recent photographs of a brassica and weed seedlings at the Lincoln GE field trial site, suggesting seed bearing top soil was spilt or the weeds have herbicide resistance.(8,9)

“What GE contaminated soil was spilt during transport from the GE field trial site to its new GE contaminated home?” asked Mr Browning.

“The removed soil is likely to have both seed and soil organisms contaminated by the previous GE program. If the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) and Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry – Biosecurity NZ are complicit in the soil removal, then New Zealand’s GE regulatory system has totally broken down as there has been no public notification or application for a new GE site.”

“Plant & Food’s failed GE onion field trial location also needs to be made public, along with the exact GE constructs used there, so that civil society can ensure independent monitoring of potential contamination in the surrounding area.”

“Soil & Health – Organic NZ is committed to a vision of an organic focused nation where Plant & Food Research and the other Crown Research Institutes resources are committed to a clean green 100% Pure GE Free Aotearoa New Zealand.”
NOTES:

100% Pure USA drive towards New Zealand as a GE nation

/in , ,

The government’s phasing out of the winning 100% Pure New Zealand brand, while putting genetic engineering (GE) zealot Dr. William Rolleston as Chair of Innovation and also on the Science Board of the new Ministry of Science and Innovation, is a clear sign that New Zealand’s science and production is further headed down a GE track, rather than the clean green 100% Pure New Zealand trail according to the Soil & Health Association of NZ. (1)

“Last week’s announcement that 100% Pure New Zealand is to be replaced by ‘100% Pure You,’ although only weeks before New Zealand had moved from 4th to 3rd strongest country brand in the world, indicates that Pure New Zealand has been given the boot because Government is not prepared to put substance to the branding,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning. (2)

In November, Tourism New Zealand’s Chief Executive Kevin Bowler said it was great to see brand New Zealand continuing to gain strength, especially in such a highly competitive international market.

“The consistency of the 100% Pure New Zealand campaign has kept New Zealand top of mind, and has made a promise that New Zealand is continuing to keep.” (3)

“Even then that promise was being broken by the Government, with significant commitment to genetic engineering and dumbing down of brand New Zealand,” said Mr Browning.

“Whether it be the dwindling support for sustainable organic production, or Government’s recent $10 million support for Crown Researcher Scion and its USA partner ArborGen’s GE trees experiments, and significantly more for AgResearch and its USA partner, GTC Biotherapeutics, cruel GE animal experiments, the current Government vision has little that is pure about it.”

“New Zealanders are proud of our clean green 100% Pure New Zealand brand, and just as we are proud of our nuclear free status, most New Zealanders and our overseas customers have shown in polls to be opposed to genetic engineering in our environment and production.”

“Inserting Dr. Rolleston and other GE proponents into key science funding and policy roles, is a clear statement that this government is a GE government,” said Mr Browning.

“The Government is intent of removing any semblance of independence in the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) , currently tasked with decisions on GE applications.  By ensuring the emerging Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), will ‘put effect’ to Government policy rather than the previous ‘have regard to,’ another sinister element is added to New Zealand’s future GE status.” (4)

“For an EPA to be effective, it must be as independent as possible, and policy for a clean green 100% Pure vision for New Zealand should be driven by those without the type of vested interests that Dr. Rolleston and his Life Sciences Network bring.”

Continued United States pressure for the uptake of GE, as revealed by Wikileaks recently and Soil & Health – Organic NZ last year, appears to be coming through in Government action. (5,6)

2010 began with the USA’s Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s Senior Science Advisor Nina Federoff visiting New Zealand and promoting GE. At the same time, Terri Dunahay, a US Department of Agriculture (USDA) international GE policy specialist, over several months, was promoting genetic engineering for New Zealand agriculture, while given a Fulbright Scholarship seat in New Zealand’s science policy agency, the Ministry of Research Science and Technology (MoRST).

“Dunahay was also given time at ERMA, with her final MoRST-USDA report on the issues affecting the uptake of GE forages in New Zealand farming, suggesting that the New Zealand public should not be able to submit on GE field trial applications and that some GE pollen release was necessary to test environmental effects.”

“The November 4th Hillary Clinton and John Key’s ‘Wellington Declaration’ signing then sealed intent on GE biofuels collaboration and the current government’s end to 100% Pure New Zealand,” believes Mr Browning.

Soil & Health – Organic NZ campaigns against the release of genetically engineered organisms into the environment and food and has a vision of an Organic 2020 in direct contrast to United States foreign policy.

Notes (links accessed January 2011):

(1)  http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/boards-key-science-and-innovation-suc…

(2) http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/news-and-features/news/tourism-new-zeal…

(3) http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/news-and-features/news/new-zealand-thir… 100% Pure New Zealand has been used to promote New Zealand as a tourism destination since 1999. Last November, New Zealand was ranked the third strongest country brand in the world by FutureBrands Country Brand Index.

(4) http://www.mfe.govt.nz/news/2010-11-16-epa-bill-introduced.html
ERMA is currently an autonomous Crown entity, slightly more independent than a Crown agent (the Minister can only require an autonomous Crown entity to have regard to, not give effect to, government policy). As one of the government’s objectives for resource management reform is to provide for better central government direction, it is vital that the chosen model allows for central government direction of the EPA. A Crown agent allows for this relationship.

(5) http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1012/S00171/wikileak-das-reed-engages-o…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/03/wikileaks-us-eu-gm-crops
(SBU) When asked what the top local impediments will be to concluding an agreement, Sinclair noted a number of areas sensitive to New Zealand. It is “no secret” that Monsanto does not like New Zealand’s genetically modified organism (GMO) regulations, Sinclair said.

(6) http://www.organicnz.org/soil-and-health-press/1235/government-support-f…

GE varroa control no Santa Claus for New Zealand beekeepers

/in , ,

Genetically engineering varroa (Varroa destructor) mites to self destruct is no Christmas present for New Zealand’s beekeepers, according to Soil & Health Association of NZ.

“Any future for New Zealand does not include genetically engineered mites being carried around New Zealand on the back of honey bees, any more than a real Santa Claus with reindeer,” said Soil & Health – Organic NZ spokesperson Steffan Browning.

“News today that Aberdeen University’s Dr Alan Bowman has announced a potential mechanism for the inoculation of mites, in a way that silences a gene in the mite, damaging its immune system, is being overstated. The research is in its infancy and potential hazards appear not to have been considered at all.” (1)

“Aberdeen University’s research needs to be seen in a broader ecological context of risk and actual potential success. Certainty would be needed that tampering with the DNA of the mite would not for example sport a mite or virus that is worse than the existing varroa, or have other unintended effects on bees, or affect mites naturally part of an indigenous ecosystem.”

“A more useful curative to varroa than what is currently available would save considerable angst and cost to New Zealand beekeepers, and more benign alternatives than genetic engineering are being researched continuously which would not impact on New Zealand’s largely GE Free status.”

“Pest control in New Zealand using genetic engineering is no more acceptable than growing GE food, forages or forests would be to Aotearoa New Zealand’s clean green 100% Pure trading and tourism brand.”

“The 5 to 10 years of further research and development that Aberdeen suggests is necessary for their postulated GE solution, allows for significant development in less risky alternatives, and research dollars would do well to be directed to those.”

“GE pest control research should always include scientists that are independently capable of imaging the very real risks that go hand in glove with such technology. Too often, research such as from Aberdeen claims potential solutions as part of touting for further research dollars, while completely ignoring the ecological risks,” said Mr Browning.

Soil & Health – Organic NZ wishes for research spending be directed to a GE free and organic varroa solution for Christmas 2011.

(1)   http://www.abdn.ac.uk/news/details-9669.php