$2.1 million Organics Advisory Service Launch

/in , ,

The Soil & Health Association welcomes the launch of the Green Party initiated $2.1 million Organic Advisory Program, and sees the program as part of New Zealand’s aim of being a truly sustainable nation.

The Organic Advisory Program, operated through Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, is an outcome of the post election negotiations between Labour and the Greens, and will be launched on Thursday March 15 at Lincoln University.

The highlight of the program, according to Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning, is the ‘Smart Start’ service, providing growers a subsidised on-farm consultancy when considering conversion to organics.

Smart Start’s personalised focus is a significant initiative that for $200 allows producers access to a one-on-one consultancy on their own property, looking at the property’s potential for conversion to certified organic production.

While the Smart Start program will be available to most producers, Soil & Health hopes for a future even more affordable program, extending to the smaller and part-time producers that may supply only a roadside or Farmers Market stall.

The current criteria for Smart Start require the producer to have commercial organic aims in excess of $20,000.

“For consumer protection it is important to get all market stall-holders, who claim organic status, to become certified,” said Mr Browning.

Soil & Health is excited about other initiatives getting underway from the Organic Advisory Program, including the 0800-Organic Helpline, a website and various regional and sector initiatives.

Serious commitment by government can build on the Organic Advisory Program through even greater support and by implementing a target of 5% of land area in organic primary production by 2012, said Mr Browning.

Targets in several other countries have allowed significant growth in organics and sustainability benefits, while benefiting huge growth in international and domestic consumer demand for organic products.

For Soil & Health, this week’s launch of the Organic Advisory Program and, in particular, the on-farm Smart Start service are milestones towards an Organic 2020 and a truly sustainable nation.

NZ needs a clean seed industry

/in , ,

The report by David Oughton from his inquiry into the importation of genetically engineered corn seeds in late 2006, shows institutional corruption and calls into question the ethics of at least some individuals involved in border surveillance according to the Soil & Health Association spokesperson Steffan Browning.

The continued GE incursions also show the need for an urgent expansion of New Zealand’s seed growing industry, a ban on imports of seed from countries and companies that consistently supply contaminated seed.

That a MAF Quarantine Service officer who participated in the earlier decision to remove the requirements for double checks in approving risky seed imports, was also the officer that then ignored positive GE tests and allowed the GE contaminated sweet corn into New Zealand fields, has a very bad smell about it, according to Mr Browning.

The fact that of 90 consignments in 2006, 30 had incomplete computer records shows that staff involved were not taking the issue seriously and maybe some positions need reviewing, as much as systems need improving. This goes right to the top however, said Mr Browning, and the culture of indifference comes from many levels of government that have an arrogant and cavalier attitude to the wishes of New Zealanders and to the risks of Genetic Engineering. New Zealand’s zero tolerance to GE contamination must be defended effectively.

The Oughton report points out a need for improved border control systems focused on the dominant risk seed species; Brassica napus var . oleifera (oil seed rape), Glycine max (soy bean), Zea mays (corn/maize), Medicago sativa (lucerne/alfalfa).

Soil & Health agrees and sees a further method of precaution in a total ban on importation on those species from the US and other countries producing such GE seed.

Some giant seed companies are also consistently the suppliers of contaminated seed and should be penalised for supplying shonky product. Syngenta was the supplier of all the contaminated seed in this recent event, and is the subject of legal proceedings in several countries.

One independent US seed grower with New Zealand interests, has told me that he would prefer to see a New Zealand seed industry developed as GE Free, to allow varieties to be grown on in confidence in New Zealand and be marketed to an eager world, said Mr Browning. The niche market for New Zealand is clean and green and the commercial opportunities are superior to risky seed importation.

Contrary to some seed importers claims, the advantages of new imported varieties do not match the combined benefits of a New Zealand seed industry and clean product for rapidly growing lucrative and discerning markets. Soil & Health promotes Organic 2020 which fits well with the international growth in organics and has no place for GE contamination.

Soil & Health wants staff changes in border control, improved checking systems, a ban on risky imports and strong government encouragement for the New Zealand seed industry.

Ban Breast Cancer Pesticide

/in , , ,

A pesticide that has been linked to breast cancer needs to be banned, say several community groups. The pesticide, endosulfan, is already banned in at least 20 countries.

The pesticide is at the top of the priority list of hazardous substances that the groups say the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) ought to reassess. ERMA is calling for submissions on which hazardous substances should be given priority reassessment by this Tuesday 30th January.

The groups, Safe Food Campaign, Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa, the Soil and Health Association and the Breast Cancer Network, point out that usage of this pesticide remains high in New Zealand, in spite of research linking it to adverse health and environmental effects. Apart from breast cancer, the insecticide has been linked to hormonal disruption, mimicking oestrogen and producing infertility, as well as foetal, gene, neurological, behavioural and immune system damage at very low doses. It persists in the environment and has been found in groundwater, soil and human breast milk.

“This antiquated organochlorine is long past its use-by-date”, said Dr Meriel Watts of Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa. “Many other countries have found safer alternatives and it is long past time we did too. It has devastated exposed communities overseas, causing many deaths and birth defects. It can cause breast cancer cells to proliferate at very, very low doses, and yet it is turning up in our food supply at increasing levels. It simply has to go. We have one of the highest rates of breast cancer in the world and we must do everything we can to reduce exposure to chemicals that increase the risk of breast cancer”.

“We also urgently want to get chlorpyrifos and all other organophosphates banned”, stated Alison White of the Safe Food Campaign. “Research published last month shows that 3-year-old children exposed to chlorpyrifos suffer nerve and mental damage as well as increased attention deficit disorder. A lot of very recent research reveals disturbing damage to the prenatal brain. Several overseas authorities, including the USA, EU, Canada and Australia, impose stringent restrictions on this insecticide and other organophosphates”, she added.

“2,4-D, the other half of Agent Orange, is still aerially sprayed and used a lot in New Zealand”, said Steffan Browning, Soil and Health Association spokesperson. “It causes a lot of spraydrift complaints and needs to be banned. It has caused severe economic losses and serious health effects to a number of farmers and their families, resulting in some of them giving up farming. Research has linked this herbicide to prenatal brain damage, breast and other cancers, and it has been shown to have an effect on hormones”, said Mr Browning. “Continuing dioxin contamination of 2,4-D causes even further effects.”

“Growers urgently need to stop using these damaging pesticides and change to more sustainable ways of growing which don’t damage our health, environment and New Zealand’s clean green reputation”, concluded Mr Browning.

Dirty Food Technologies

/in , , ,

Time for Government to Pull Up NZ’s Slide into Dirty Food Technologies.

The Soil & Health Association wants 2007 to be the year that New Zealand confirms its Clean Green image and snaps the crown agencies out of the slide into the unsustainable and unwanted activities of GE and animal cloning.

Soil & Health also wants Fonterra, Meat New Zealand and other key commercial agencies and productive sectors to confirm that they will not be part of the slide to food production using cloning or genetic engineering.

Although against international consumer trends, government agency AgResearch has supported the US Food and Drug Administration’s direction of bringing food from cloned animals into the food chain.

Crop & Food another government institution continues to push ahead with genetically engineered food plant trials. Forest Research continues with its GE tree trials. Landcare Research is researching GE biological pest controls.

“With key politicians mooting a new era of sustainability and for ‘sustainability to be central to New Zealand’s unique national identity’, Clean and Green and 100% Pure need to be reinforced as New Zealand images, not attacked by unproven, high risk and unwanted technologies,” said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

Of particular recent concern was AgResearch’s cloning call, according to Soil & Health. AgResearch is way out of step with consumer preferences, and AgResearch support for the US FDA’s position that includes a no labelling intent for foods derived from cloned animals, is both arrogant and a call for commercial disaster.

GE Free and Clone Free must be standard for New Zealand in the new era of sustainability and huge international market growth for organics.

New Zealand benefits from its clean and green reputation, and foods need to be labelled to ensure consumers both in NZ and overseas can choose GE and clone free.

Consumers won’t want food that has animal welfare implications either, according to Mr Browning, noting that cloning has caused significant suffering in animals already.

Any involvement by Fonterra in cloning is also a step away from a sustainable future for its farmer owners. Real value-added products will have genuine ECO sustainability ticks or organic certification, not risky new food concoctions.

Organic certification, which is the vanguard of consumer guarantees for sustainable production, does not allow either GE or cloning in either production or processing.

Government expressing a target of an Organic 2020 to its funding and research agencies would be far more productive for New Zealand’s reputation, market appeal, and food and environmental safety.

Submissions Against GE Brassicas

/in
Submission to: Environmental Risk Management Authority
Friday, December 8, 2006

Dec 8, 2006

Dear Members

Re: GE Brassica Field Trial

Crop & Food Research has applied to ERMA (Environmental Risk Management Authority) to spend taxpayers’ money on a 10-year field trial of genetically engineered brassicas: specifically cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower and forage kale. Plants would have genes spliced from bacteria and viruses, including ‘Bt’ (Bacillus thuringiensis), in order to kill cabbage white butterfly and diamond backed moth.

Soil and Health is supporting Organic Aotearoa New Zealand’s substantive submission opposing the trial, and putting in our own submission. We encourage members to write submissions to ERMA opposing the field trial.

SUBMISSIONS ARE DUE BY TUES 12 DECEMBER 2006

You should quote Crop and Food Research’s application GMF06001. Submit in writing to ERMA NZ, PO Box 131, Wellington, 6140, by fax to ERMA NZ, 04 914 0433, or online at www.ermanz.govt.nz. Include name, contact details, signature, the date, reasons for your submission, and the decision you seek.

As follows are some points you may wish to use, and websites for further information.
www.gefree.org.nz
www.giantexperiment.co.nz
www.GEinfo.org.nz
www.i-sis.org.uk
www.gmwatch.org

Thanks for considering this! We hope our submissions will lead to a rejection of the trial and protection of organic and GE-free crops and food. Let’s work together towards an Organic 2020.

Mike Palmers, Co-Chair

 

——-

I/We strongly urge ERMA to decline this application for the following reasons:

Environmental Risks and Lack of Long-term Sustainability

* There is no point approving this field trial for genetically engineered brassicas unless they are to eventually be grown commercially. However, if grown commercially, these GE brassicas will cause GE contamination of other brassica crops and honey, and destroy New Zealand’s clean, green image.
* Target insect pests will become resistant to crops genetically engineered with Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), as has happened overseas.
* Insect resistance could result in more use of toxic sprays to control pests.
* Brassica pollen is readilty spread by insects, and GE brassicas would cross easily with dozens of wild and cultivated cousins.
* Any short-lived benefits before white cabbage butterfly and diamond backed moth are resistant comes at the cost of irreversible GE contamination.

Removal of Farmer Choice

* Insect resistance to Bt-engineered plants will result in the loss of a safe and important tool (natural Bt) for organic and conventional farmers.
* Contamination will remove farmer choice to grow GE-free food.
* If commercially grown, GE brassicas will contaminate GE-free crops, potentially making farmers liable for having illegal GE plants.

Removal of Consumer Choice

* Contamination will remove people’s right to buy and grow GE-free food. New Zealanders have stated clearly and often that they want to protect the availability of safe, natural and organic food.

Loss of Markets

* GE contamination – even trace levels – threatens our economy because of loss of exports to overseas markets, which have rejected GE foods.
* This field trial would tarnish New Zealand’s clean green image and reputation for producing safe and natural foods.

Liability

* Current liability laws are not strict enough to hold GE experimenters financially accountable for unintended or unforseen adverse impacts on farmers, consumers or the environment.
* Communities face paying (through rates, taxes or indirectly) the costs of clean-up, compensation and dealing with insect pests that have become resistant.

Use of Public Money

* Public money should not be spent on GE products, which the majority of New Zealanders (67% in recent surveys) do not want.
* GE-free methods of pest control in brassicas are already being practiced in organic systems. Public funds should be used for further research into sustainable, organic spest reduction methods.

Potential Negative Health Impacts

* Evidence of health impacts from Bt crops on people and animals must be fully investigated before the application is even considered.
* GE plants containing antibiotic-resistant marker genes can add to existing problems in controlling disease.
* Some forms of Bt toxins have been identified as potential allergens in humans.

Lack of Information from Applicant

* ERMA should not approve this field trial because the precise combination of plant, bacteria, virus and other genes is not known.
* Blanket approval cannot be justified, as different re-combinations may present different risks and therefore should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
* Independent scientists cannot provide expert advice on proper risk-management without knowing the gene-profile of the GE plants created.

Decision Sought
The risks of this field trial far outweigh any potential benefits. For all the above reasons, this field trial application must be rejected.

NZ doesn’t need dirty sweet corn

/in , , ,

Following the latest GE seed border incursion, the Soil and Health Association of New Zealand is once again calling for a stop to imports of sweet corn and maize seed, until absolute certainty of nil GE contamination is achieved.

‘Clean green New Zealand farmers deserve better protection by Biosecurity NZ, and those affected by dirty seed need fast assurance of fair compensation, just as the wider community needs assurance that the contaminated seed and young plants will be destroyed,’ said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning,

‘It is increasingly frustrating and disturbing having repeated border incursions of dirty seed. If some in MAF Biosecurity are letting their team and the rest of New Zealand down, and zero tolerance cannot be assured, then MAF must encourage further development of New Zealand’s own clean seed industry’.

‘Self sufficiency in clean seed can protect New Zealand’s clean green reputation as a GE Free producer’.

Prime Minister Helen Clark’s call for New Zealand to be the world’s first truly sustainable nation included the statement: “I want sustainability to be central to New Zealand’s unique national identity….”

‘Our unique national identity includes Nuclear Free and GE Free for most kiwis, and these repeated incursions tarnish that identity’, said Mr Browning.

‘Contrary to Dr William Rolleston of Life Sciences Network, who doesn’t mind a little contamination, the large majority of New Zealanders have consistently indicated they don’t want GE contaminated food or have GE crops grown.’

‘Organic growers and consumers who have sights on an Organic 2020 don’t need Life Sciences contaminated thinking. We want food and crops that our consumers and markets appreciate, not dirty low value commodities’.
Soil & Health is also concerned that possible dilution of contaminated parent lines of seed may be allowing intentional contamination into New Zealand.

Such concerns, according to Mr Browning, further fuel the need to develop New Zealand’s seed industry as part of a Clean Green, GE Free, Nuclear Free national identity.

Organic Farming Offsets Food Miles

/in , , ,

Organic farming offers solutions to the current food miles debate. Not only that, but it leads the way in low energy farming, and will help New Zealand reach its carbon neutral targets, according to the Soil & Health Association.

“Consumers are rightly becoming concerned about ‘food miles’, because the fossil fuel used in transporting food contributes to climate change through CO2 emissions,” says Soil and Health spokesperson, Steffan Browning. “However, New Zealand and overseas reports all show that organic production uses much less energy than conventional farming.”

Other bonuses are that organic production is the preferred consumer choice, it increases carbon sequestration and has much lower externalised environmental costs.

The Lincoln University report, Food Miles – Comparative Energy/Emissions Performance of New Zealand’s Agriculture Industry, by Saunders, Barber and Taylor, argues that with food miles, it is not just the distance that should be assessed but the total energy used, from production to plate, including transport.

The report, released in July, shows that New Zealand products use less energy, and have lower emissions per tonne of product delivered to the UK, than UK products do. It quotes a report by Defra (UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs): “…it can be more sustainable to import organic food into the UK than to grow non-organic food in the UK.”

The Lincoln report quotes Swedish research over 23 dairy farms, “…. these tests showed that the total energy use of organic dairy farms per unit of production was significantly less than each of the two conventional types of farms, …. A similar picture emerged for CO2 emissions.”

Soil & Health noted from the Lincoln report, that environmental costs of current farming systems when added to consumer prices are about 4 times that of the organic equivalent cost.

The Lincoln report also quoted a list of strategies for the consumer to avoid food miles when making purchases, provided by the UK Women’s Environmental Network. Their top five most ethical choices are (in order):

1. Organic, local and seasonal
2. Local
3. Fairtrade and organic
4. Organic
5. Fairtrade

The Soil & Health Association of NZ shares these principles as part of its Organic 2020 vision, but can see a place for sustainably produced organic goods from New Zealand being efficiently shipped to complement shortfalls in local British product.

While the Lincoln study did not consider carbon sequestration, American studies show that organic methods are far more effective than conventional methods at taking CO2 from the atmosphere and fixing it as beneficial organic matter in the soil. The 23-year Rodale Institute study calculated that if 10,000 mid sized U.S. farms converted to organic production, it would be equivalent to taking 1,174,400 cars off the road, or not driving 14.62 billion miles.

Former British Environment Minister Michael Meacher told a 2004 Soil Association conference in Edinburgh, that the government must boost organics to help Britain meet its Kyoto targets. He also highlighted the Rodale Institute research, which also found that soluble nitrogen fertilisers in conventional farming destroyed soil biota that trap greenhouse gases.

The Soil & Health Association of NZ sees continued government support for the organic sector as an important solution to food miles arguments, and to the Prime Minister’s aim of a truly sustainable New Zealand.

Brassica trial crazy

/in , , ,

Crop & Food’s intended GE Brassica field trial is even crazier than their existing GE onion trial, according to Soil & Health, and move in the opposite direction to the Prime Ministers sustainability vision.

Potential key drawbacks are:

1. Early resistance by pests
2. Fast spread of GE brassicas and interbreeding contamination
3. Contamination of GMO free crops
4. Loss of markets through contamination
5. Loss of markets through NZ’s Clean Green image loss
6. Human and animal health risks

The use of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) in genetically engineered crops has shown an early build of resistance in pest insects, resulting in the loss of a safe and important tool for many farmers.

Organic producers are able to use Bt and careful use has maintained its benefit without pest resistance. Organic and GMO free producers markets demand products free of GMO contamination.

The current use of Bt poses little risk to humans or stock as the toxin only occurs in the pest caterpillar’s gut.

GMO Bt poses risks as the toxin is in every cell of the GM crop including that eaten by consumers and also the pollen and roots.

Brassica pollen travels large distances, the seeds are small and brassicas cross easily, with hundreds of variants in existence. GMO brassicas will be one of the riskiest and dirtiest GMO crops possible.

The use of GMO crops flies in the face of Prime Minister Helen Clark’s vision of New Zealand being in the vanguard of sustainability, with New Zealand being the first truly sustainable nation, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

A truly sustainable nation will have no part in GM crops or stock.

Crop & Food’s is a State Owned Enterprise whose persistence with experimenting with many vegetable and flower crops that are creeping into field trial applications is contrary to New Zealand’s Clean Green image.

Crop & Food are experimenting with a number of brassicas and also tomatoes, cucurbits, onions, asparagus, orchids, cyclamen, snapdragons, pelargoniums, violas and others in their laboratories. A lot more than most are aware of, according to Browning.

“It is time to stop these experiments if there is no serious expectation to grow in New Zealand. New Zealanders have clearly stated that GM crops are not wanted.”

PMs Sustainability Vision most important statement for some time

/in , ,

The Soil & Health Association congratulates Prime Minister Helen Clark for the vision of New Zealand being the world’s first truly sustainable nation.

Yesterday at the Labour Party Conference the Prime Minister asked, “Why shouldn’t New Zealand aim to be the first country which is truly sustainable… I believe that sustainability will be a core value in 21st century social democracy…

* I want New Zealand to be in the vanguard of making it happen – for our own sakes, and for the sake of our planet.
* I want sustainability to be central to New Zealand’s unique national identity….”

“This is the most important and exciting statement for New Zealand’s future for some time from that level,” said Steffan Browning, Soil & Health spokesperson, “New Zealanders will welcome a vision of a truly clean green country.”

This significant vision fits with the Soil & Health vision of an Organic 2020, where by the year 2020 most of New Zealand’s production is certified organic and the remainder is in conversion to organic.

With milestones towards an Organic 2020 being difficult to achieve until recently, such vision from the Prime Minister is encouraging. It comes on the back of last year’s Government funding support for sector group Organics Aotearoa New Zealand, and the Green Party initiated funding for an Organics Advisory Service.

“Organic milestones will be more easily attained with a sustainability vision coming from the Prime Minister,” said Mr Browning.

“Organic production leads the way in sustainable methods of primary production, and a visionary Prime Minister will hopefully do all in her power to ensure the organic sector, as a vanguard of sustainability, can maintain its development into the future.”

Prime Minister Helen Clark finished, “Our country is special, and our people are special.” Soil & Health would add its motto ‘Healthy Soil, Healthy Food, Healthy People.”

An organic exemption from folic? Could be.

/in , , ,

The Soil & Health Association is thrilled that there is to be a review of the decision to mandatorily fortify bread with folic acid.

The review allows further opportunity for an exemption from the fortification proposal for organic breads to be considered.

“Soil & Health is grateful that New Zealand Food Safety Minister Annette King has allowed this further opportunity”, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning.

Soil & Health and other organic organisations on both sides of the Tasman have called for their Food Standards Ministers to allow consumer choice through an organic exemption.

“Such an exemption would allow for organic bread to be as organic consumers expect,” said Mr Browning, “that is, bread without any artificial additives.”

The Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council meeting held in Sydney, where NZ’s Food Safety Minister met with 9 Australian ministers yesterday, reinforced its commitment to mandatory fortification, with the review over 6 months.

The Ministers’ joint communiqué included,

“Food Standards Australia New Zealand have been asked to review the proposed standard due to technical considerations with the implementation of the standard, and compliance issues, within six months.”

Soil & Health is aware of many letters to NZ Minister Annette King from organic consumers. Australian organic consumers and organisations recently also called on Australian Ministers to consider an exemption.

Members of Parliament from a range of parties also supported the Soil & Health position, as did New Zealand Consumers Institute, with Organics Aotearoa New Zealand leading an organic sector delegation to a recent meeting with Annette King.

“An organic exemption from mandatory fortification with folic acid would show acknowledgement of the rights of organic consumers to continue selecting their food according to their needs, and for organic millers and bakers to remain in business”, said Mr Browning.

An exemption for organic bread will give all consumers a choice of a fortification free product while still accessing a healthy option.