Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Round Up Ready Weeds

Round up ready crops have led to at least 10 weeds that have developed resistance to the chemical glyphosate. This isn't the dooms day scenario that environmentalists predicted. But it is a stern warning that we need to change our strategy when it comes to dealing with weeds, insects, and other pests that result in lower yields and farmer income. The modern industrial agriculture complex has its limits and externalities. We are finally becoming aware of them. What we don't want or need is to repeat the same mistake more then once. If we do, we could be threatening our sustainability.

Round Up Ready Resistant Weeds

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Say no to GMO!

From Food Democracy Now. Tell Obama to stop the sneak attack on GMO labeling! Preserve our seed heritage. Preserve organics and sustainable agriculture. Preserve family farms the backbone of our culture, heritage, and economy.

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/cms/sign/stop_the_sneak_attack/

Monday, April 19, 2010

Pakistan is turning the irreversible corner

http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=233424

Pakistan is entering the world of GMOs. Monsanto's pursuit of the global market share for seeds is scary for several reasons.

1) GMOs are bad for biodiversity and biodiversity is the cornerstone of human civilization.
2) Farmers in the developing world do not have the knowledge capacities required for managing GMOs and their required inputs.
3) Higher yields don't always mean more profit. In the case of GMOs higher yields often mean higher fixed costs for farmers. They will be required to purchase more seeds, herbicides, and fertilizers. GMOs really mean higher profits for multi-nationals and more debt for farmers.
4) GMOs may be bad for our health. The jury is still out. But a simple word of wisdom applies to GMOs that we should all listen to more often. "If man made it, don't eat it."

Thursday, April 15, 2010

What is the role of government regulation when it comes to GMO's? The current system of regulation has companies responsible for their own regulation. Is that really smart? It seems to me it is a bit like telling a 5 year old that he or she can decide how many cookies she wants to eat before dinner while leaving the lid open on the cookie jar. Adequate regulation requires a balance of biases and agendas. Right now the 5 year old gets to eat as many cookies as he or she wants and that is not good for the 5 year old, his or her siblings, or his or her parents.


http://www.bworldonline.com/main/content.php?id=8975

Friday, February 26, 2010

Know your food source

This NY Times article is just one more example why Americans should demand more accountability in the agriculture and food production sectors. I'm not talking about more regulation. I'm talking about consumers having access to all the facts about where their food comes from.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/business/25tomatoes.html?scp=2&sq=tomato%20&st=cse

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

A stunted green revolution

Too much Urea has sterilized the Indian soil. A recent article published by the Wall Street Journal Online tells the story of mismanagement of the Nitrogen fertilizer in India.

Will Indian farmers respond by using more complex chemical fertilizers? Or will they learn to adapt more sustainable approaches? Click on the link below for more information.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703615904575052921612723844.html?mod=wsj_share_facebook

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

India's Counter Green Revolution

An interesting event has occurred in India. The Environment and Forestry Ministry has put an indefinite ban on the sale of genetically modified eggplant seeds until a broader consensus within the country can be reached regarding the use of this particular seed. No doubt the ministry's hesitation reflects the growing unease around the world regarding the use of GMOs. The use of GMOs are controversial. Despite their higher yields and resistance to common pests many farmers and scientists are concerned about the legal, ethical, and biological implications of using GMOs.

The particular seed was developed by a subsidiary of Monsanto in India. Monsanto is one of the largest biotech companies in the world.

This particular seed is modified to deal with a common pest that destroys 40% of India's eggplant production each year. It sounds like a good piece of technology. However, a few important questions need to be asked before we support the use of this GMO.

First, are there farmers in India who have been able to control the pests this seed will deter? If so, what are they doing? I would imagine that there are innovative and local solutions to this local problem. Farmers are smart. In particular are there farmers who are using integrated pest management (IPM) successfully? IPM is technique that uses several different methods of pest control including soil management, crop rotation, traps, and poly-culture.

Second, when did this particular pest become a problem? Has it always been a problem or is it a historically new phenomenon? If it is new (15-20) years then we have to ask what has changed in the environment or methods? Could that be the source of the pest? Why pull the mother out of the river down stream when you can save a mother and child up stream?

Third, it is important to review the literature that documents pests and disease resistance to GMOs. How long will it take for these pests to develop a resistance to the GMO?

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-10/india-rejects-first-gm-vegetable-hampering-monsanto-update1-.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB40001424052748704140104575058383515565108.html