GM CROPS ARE ECONOMIC DISASTER SHOWS NEW REPORT
PRESS RELEASE 06/05/2003: ARCHIVED Categories: GMO | News | News: campaigns | News: consumers | News: farmers & growers | News: manufacturers & retailers | Press Releases 2002 | Research Papers | USA | Downloads and other links
Genetically modified crops have been an economic disaster in the USA and Canada according to a new report published by the Soil Association. The Soil Association estimates that GM soya, maize and oilseed rape could have cost the US economy $12 billion (£8 billion) since 1999 in farm subsidies, lower crop prices, loss of major export orders and product recalls. Farmers are not achieving the higher profits promised by the biotechnology companies as markets for GM food collapse. Widespread GM contamination at all levels of the food and farming industry is the major cause of these difficulties. Severe problems with GM crops has led to over 200 groups representing farmers and the organic sector in the USA and Canada to call for a ban or moratorium on the introduction of the next major proposed GM food crop, GM wheat. Some politicians in the USA are so concerned that in May this year, legislation was introduced to Congress to address the economic, market and legal issues. The Soil Association’s report is the first to reveal the serious widespread impacts of GM crops in North America on the food and farming industry, where three-quarters of the world’s GM food is grown. It is the most comprehensive review of the situation to be produced from a non-biotechnology industry perspective. Peter Melchett, the Soil Association’s Policy Director said: “A decision will be made next year whether to allow GM crops to be grown commercially in the UK. With agriculture still suffering a deep economic crisis, the temptation to seize a new technology is great. “GM was introduced to the USA when farmers were financially vulnerable. The biotechnology industry’s claims that their products would bring benefits were widely accepted, but GM crops have now proved to be a financial liability. Growing GM crops in the UK will undermine the competitiveness of British agriculture. “We hope farmers in the UK will take our findings seriously. Most of the world is GM-free and there is no market for GM crops in the EU. “The Soil Association hopes that this report will result in a better informed public debate, and a more independent, less pressurised decision about the possible commercial growing of GM crops in the UK. We can still avoid the mistakes made in the USA and Canada, but only if we don't open the can of GM worms that commercial growing of GM crops represents. “The Government is publicly committed to ensuring that the expansion of organic farming is not undermined by GM crops - our report shows that the two cannot coexist.” Seeds of doubt: experiences of North American farmers of genetically modified crops, is available from the Soil Association Mail Order Department on 0117 929 0661, mtrowell@soilassociation.org or from http://www.soilassociation.org/seedsofdoubt price £12. Ends Notes: For media enquiries only, contact the Soil Association Media Office on 0117 914 2448 or sflook@soilasssociation.org. Over the three years 1999, 2000 and 2001, the USA paid out an estimated total extra $10 billion (£6.5 billion) in farm subsidies for maize and soya (as 'Loan Deficiency Payments' and 'Market Loss Assistance') as a result of the low prices caused by the loss of trade due to GM crops. The loss of foreign trade due to GM crops totalled an estimated $1-2 billion (£0.6 billion - £1 billion) . The StarLink incident has cost an estimated $1 billion (£0.6 billion) including the product recall. GM oilseed rape, maize, soya and cotton have been grown commercially in North America since 1996. They are all used in vegetable oils and animal feed, and soya is widely used in processed food. The report is based on interviews with organic and conventional farmers in the Mid-West states of America in January and February 2002, as well as evidence from independent academics, advisers and industry analysts in the USA and Canada. Nestle, Unilever and Heinz, plus the major UK supermarkets have a ban on GM food ingredients in own brand products. Many are now using GM-free animal feed. GMOs are prohibited in organic farming and food processing in view of their incompatibility with the principles of organic agriculture, their unrecallable nature and the potential risks they pose to the environment and human health. Seeds of doubt: experiences of North American farmers of genetically modified crops Main findings Lower profits for farmers growing GM crops: The profitability of growing GM herbicide tolerant soya and insect-resistant Bt maize is less than non-GM crops. This is due to the extra cost of GM seed (which can be up to 40% higher), the lower market prices paid for GM crops, and reduced soya yields. Collapse of export markets: within a few years of the introduction of GM crops, almost the entire $300 million (£200 million) annual US maize exports to the EU and the $300 million annual Canadian rape exports to the EU had disappeared due to market rejection. The US share of the world soya market has decreased while non-GM producing countries have seen an increase. Increase in government subsidies: US farm subsidies were meant to have fallen over the last few years. Instead they rose dramatically, paralleling the growth in GM crops. The lost export trade as a result of GM crops is thought to have caused a fall in crop prices and a need for increased government subsidies, estimated at an extra $3-$5 billion (£2 - £3 billion) annually. Lower yields: the claims of increased yields have not been realised overall except for a small increase in Bt maize yields. The main GM variety (Roundup Ready soya) yields 6-11% less than non-GM varieties. A farmer in Mississippi was awarded over $165,000 (£100,000) in damages from Monsanto for low GM soya yields. Widespread contamination of non-GM crops: contamination has caused major problems throughout the food and farming industry in just a couple of years, including the loss of nearly the whole organic oilseed rape sector in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. Non-GM seeds varieties are difficult to buy, and even these may turn out to be contaminated. Those who are successful in sourcing non-GM seeds risk having their crops contaminated by neighbouring GM fields. Many organic and other GM-free maize farmers have lost sales or received lower prices because of contamination at a potential cost of over $90 million (£60 million) annually. Premiums for non-GM crops: farmers who are successfully growing non-GM crops are reaping benefits, with one farmer reporting that organic soya is selling at a 200 per cent premium. A proliferation of lawsuits and the emergence of complex legal issues: biotechnology companies are suing many farmers for infringing company patent rights, saying that they have unlicensed GM plants on their land. A non-GM farmer whose crop was contaminated by GMOs was sued by Monsanto for $400,000 (£260,000). Farmers are turning to the courts for compensation from the companies for lost income and markets as a result of contamination. In Canada, legal action has been launched by the organic sector in Saskatchewan because they cannot supply the organic rape market with GM-free rape, which could cost biotechnology companies millions of dollars. Increased use of herbicides: Contrary to claims from the biotechnology industry, farmers are now more reliant on herbicides (weedkillers). Certain crops have been engineered to be resistant to specific herbicides to enable farmers to spray weeds without damaging crops. Although it was claimed that only one application would be needed per crop, several are being made. In addition, weeds are developing resistance to these herbicides, and rogue GM plants that grow after a harvest (volunteers) have appeared and spread widely. In particular, GM oilseed rape volunteers– the GM crop most likely to be introduced in the UK – have spread quickly, and some plants have become resistant to several herbicides through cross pollination. As a result, farmers are making more frequent applications and reverting to older and more toxic chemicals. GM food recalls: the most expensive recall concerned GM Starlink which was approved for animal feed, but not human consumption. However, it was found in food products such as taco shells and the recall cost to Aventis is estimated to be up to $1 billion (£0.5 billion). In 1998, cross-pollination from GM maize was suspected of contaminating organic maize in Texas. This was only discovered once the maize was shipped to Europe as organic tortilla chips, costing the small company more than $150,000 (£100,000). » read a summary » support our GM policy work - make a donation online » take action » buy or download the report top More links Search library with term gmo Search rest of website with term gmo top Library documents in GMO category » Gordon does ‘a Tony’: falls for GM hype 06/19/2008 » New Soil Association report shows GM crops do not yield more - sometimes less 04/25/2008 » Public unaware that most milk, dairy products and pork from GM 11/16/2007 » Brits say 'No' to GM as the Soil Association asks Government: 'keep your promise' 11/09/2007 » Organic consumers shouldn’t pay for GM contamination – representatives of 70 organic companies tell Miliband 06/21/2007 » Soil Association welcomes European Parliament decision for 0.1% GM threshold 03/29/2007 » Biotechnology: a technology we do not need 03/13/2007 » Contrasting the use of genetic engineering in medicine and agriculture 03/06/2007 » L-tryptophan: what made this GM food supplement kill 37 people and disable 1500? 02/19/2007 » GM rice - not nice 02/08/2007 » Organic companies threatened by Government GM proposals - businesses with turnover of £950,000,000 left in the cold by Government consultation 02/05/2007 » Blair's contaminated legacy 02/01/2007 » 'Tarnished silver bullets': Bt cotton reduces farmer incomes and fails to reduce pesticide usage in China 01/12/2007 » Proposals for managing the co-existence of GM, conventional and organic crops Soil Association response to Defra consultation October 2006 11/10/2006 » GM potatoes - summary of the risks 09/04/2006 » GM crop seperation distances 08/17/2006 » Pollen dispersal in the crops Maize (Zea mays), Oil seed rape (Brassica napus ssp oleifera), Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum), Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris ssp. vulgaris) and Wheat (Triticum aestivum) 08/17/2006 » Help stop GM contamination 08/11/2006 » Bt cotton in China - Soil Association response 07/27/2006 » Blair's contaminated legacy 07/24/2006 » “Managing the Footprint of Agriculture: Towards a Comparative Assessment of Risks and Benefits for Novel Agricultural Systems” Soil Association response to ACRE consultation June 2006 07/19/2006 » GM - No to 0.9% 06/27/2006 » GM - update and suggestions for action 06/21/2006 » Soil Association response to the Department for International Development's strategy for agriculture in developing countries 12/07/2005 » Towards a UK Strategy for Biofuels - Soil Association response to Department for Transport consultation, July 2004 12/02/2005 » GM liability – who should carry the can? Soil Association response to consultation paper from Mark Ruskell MSP, February 2004 12/01/2005 » GM - Unravelling the DNA myth 11/09/2005 » Organic standards: Work in process 11/09/2005 » University of Newcastle research on the transfer of DNA from GM food into bacteria in the human gut 05/31/2005 » GM Food: Scientific Evidence of Health Risks 05/19/2004 » The Government’s recent decision about GM Written Evidence from the Soil Association to EFRA inquiry, April 2004 04/26/2004 » IFOAM EU group position paper on co-existence between GM and non-GM crops 03/12/2004 » GM liability – who should carry the can? Soil Association response to consultation paper from Mark Ruskell MSP, February 2004 02/26/2004 » Soil Association response to ACRE report 01/14/2004 » Impacts of GM crops on agrochemical use in the US 01/08/2004 » GM Food : Evaluating the Farm Scale Trials Evidence from the Soil Association to the Environmental Audit Committee’s inquiry, November 2003 12/05/2003 » Government must protect organic food and consumers 11/25/2003 » Soil Association response to the government's inquiry into the adequacy of the GM public debate, September 2003 11/21/2003 » GM Crop Farm-scale Evaluations Evidence from the Soil Association to ACRE, November 2003 11/18/2003 » Canadian farmers tour UK to argue against GM crops 10/17/2003 » "GM Nation?" report welcomed by organic farmers 10/16/2003 » Best practice in communicating the results of new scientific research to the public - Soil Association response to Royal Society consultation 10/16/2003 » GM Nation? The minister speaks 10/16/2003 » GM-free regions still possible 09/08/2003 » Effect of GM crops on health will not be monitored 09/03/2003 » Guidance on Post-market Monitoring of GM Crops - Soil Association response to ACRE consultation, August 2003 08/13/2003 » Blair urged to identify Government scientific advisor who threatened anti-GM scientist 07/25/2003 » Study shows lack of research into GM health effects 07/23/2003 » Soil Association welcomes Strategy Unit report on GM crops 07/11/2003 » GM labelling threshold too high 07/03/2003 » Sheepdrove Farm: letter to farmers about GM crops 06/24/2003 » Soil Association backs Meacher's stance on GM crops 06/23/2003 » The Case for a GM-Free Sustainable World: Independent Science Panel report 06/20/2003 » GM seeds spread by vehicles and feet 06/18/2003 » Meacher gap leaves concerns over GM 06/13/2003 » GM Crop Trials 06/11/2003 » Liability is crucial issue in GM debate 06/11/2003 » Flavr Savr tomato & GM tomato puree: The failure of the first GM foods 06/06/2003 » Key concerns about GM 06/05/2003 » Majority of American organic farmers at risk from GM 05/31/2003 » Food Standards Agency condemned again over GM bias 05/23/2003 » Soil Association introduces GM testing policy 04/02/2003 » GM crops policy update, March 2003 03/24/2003 » Broom's Barn GM Sugar Research 03/19/2003 » Food Standards Agency attacked over breakaway GM debate 03/04/2003 » Genetic modification – making cotton more sustainable? 02/21/2003 » Soil Association disputes new GM research findings 01/15/2003 » The Soil Association’s Response the Scottish Parliament Health Committee’s inquiry into the health impact of GM crops. November 2002 11/22/2002 » Pollen Dispersal - Evidence from Publications 07/25/2002 » Vandana Shiva's speech, 27 March 2002 06/28/2002 » EU study: GM crops more costly for farmers 05/16/2002 » Soil Association Summary of the Policy Commission report, “Farming & Food - a sustainable future” 01/30/2002 » GM Food and Issues for Human Health: Response to Royal Society Consultation 04/05/2001 » Organic farms at risk from new GM trial sites 03/09/2001 » Genetic Engineering and Human Health 11/13/2000 » Genetic Engineering - The impact on environment and wildlife 09/15/2000 » Contrasting the Use of Genetic Engineering in Medicine and Agriculture 08/24/2000 » GE Vitamin `A' rice: A blind approach to blindness prevention 04/06/2000 » Segregation of GM Foods - Written Evidence to the House of Commons Select Committee on Agriculture 01/14/2000 » TAKE ACTION - Don’t let the WTO take away your choice! 11/18/99 » GM food and crops – the right to choose: Implications of the World Trade Organisation 09/24/99 » Women say NO to GMOs 09/19/99 » Keeping Genetically Manipulated Organisms out of organic food 03/28/99 » A Report on the Dispersal of Maize Pollen 03/02/99 » Relief for organic farmers as GM contamination threat lifted 12/15/2006 » Labour's GM contamination 'legally flawed' - as Government’s GM consultation ends 10/20/2006 » GM crops contaminate up to 50% of organic maize in Northern Spain 04/05/2006 » EU review of Organic Regulation: Straight bananas, euro-sausages and now... dilute organics? 02/16/2006 » WTO ruling - "No change to de facto European ban on GMOs" 02/09/2006 » Agrochemical use soars in the US because of GM crops 11/17/2004 » Soil Association welcomes MPs challenge to Government over GM planting regime 07/08/2004 » Soil Association response to Bayer Cropscience announcement on GM maize 03/31/2004 » Soil Association response to Government's decision on GM maize 03/17/2004 » Government GM decision is muddled fudge says Soil Association 03/09/2004 » Government ignores Parliament as well as public on GM crops 03/05/2004 » GM crops increase chemical use by 70 million pounds 01/13/2004 » GM CROPS ARE ECONOMIC DISASTER SHOWS NEW REPORT 06/05/2003 » GM legal issues workshop 12/20/2002 » GM contamination of organic animal feed 11/14/2002 » Blair wrong on science stance 05/22/2002 » GM crops in UK pose highest risk 03/25/2002 » Government 'chaos and confusion' over GM buffer zones 03/08/2002 » Organic crops risk GM contamination 01/30/2002 » CropGen report highlights absence of evidence on GM safety 12/07/2001 » GM-contaminated crops found in Mexico - Soil Association response 11/29/2001 » More organic farms within GM danger zone 10/09/2001 » New GM trials renews pressure on organic farms 07/27/2001 » HDRA saved but GM threat remains to organic farms 05/22/2001 » ASDA, Tesco and M&S offer consumers real choice on GM 01/26/2001 » Data from 'destroyed' GM crop used in evidence 09/29/2000 » Minister reviews GM guidelines 07/31/2000 » Blair blows Clinton's pro-GM saxophone 07/24/2000 » Consumers threatened by Government inaction on GM crops 07/07/2000 » Organic farming and biotechnology debate at Cirencester 05/30/2000 » US public interest attorney uncovers suppressed evidence of potential GM food health risks 02/26/2000 » GM Press Briefing: Monday 28 February, Edinburgh 02/25/2000 » New research confirms organic farmers fears of widespread GM pollution 01/11/2000 » Thousands to gather for organic picnic against genetically modified foods 07/08/99 » Government operates pollute now, pay later GM policy 17/6/99 06/17/99 » Ministers abdicate responsibility to protect organic farming from gene threat 21/5/99 05/21/99 » GM field trials a 'license to pollute' say Soil Association 05/11/99 » Government advice on genetic contamination challenged by new independent report 03/02/99 (: archived document)
Address of this document: http://www.soilassociation.org/web/sa/saweb.nsf/librarytitles/GMO12092002.html
top