COM 0882.041 2006-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

JAN-23-2008 1238 HARC BOB4965020 -~n.,007 This document will explain the process of technology transfer for agricultural products. But fit st, I would like to address some generalizations stated in Section I of SB 958 that lead read rs to perceptions that are not supported by additional information. '....swift and pervasive.... quick acceptance' It is true as stated that the technology addressed in this proposed legislation has been tapitlly adopted by both large and small farmers throughout the developed and developing countri-; Over 10 million farmers, of which 90% are small resource-poor farmers from devehping countries, are planting engineered commodity (large acreage) crops: soybeans, maize, (.out Vn, and canola. As with most new agricultural tools with wide-spread application they .ae introduced to the largest markets first. The technology is not proliferating in specialty crops found in Hawaii, California, Oregon. Washington, Arizona, Florida, etc., because of the uncertainty in the requirements the regulatory process (currently case by case, crop by crop, and event by event) and public acceptance: both embroiled in political and emotional struggles. Quick acceptacce cf commercialized products is not equal to availability of lots of different engineered products. As has occurred with other innovative tools in the history of agriculture economics and acceptance, not availability, will determine which crops adopt this technology. Since the earliest agricul tu: •t 1 innovation in 1701 AD advances in this area have been controversial. The current expericrce is no different. '...may pose serious consequences for the health and safety of our citizens...' It has been documented world-wide by numerous countries' expert advisory/task forcc paael:, international scientific professional associations, and Nobel Prize winners that the engincer~d products in the marketplace are safe and that the technology can be used safely. The t,VTO recently ruled that the European Union's moratorium on genetically modified crops hal i o scientific basis and that its ban was illegal. The process that allows for the deregulation oft u, crops in the marketplace throughout the world obviously worked with respect to the health x1d safety of the products. What basis is there to claim that it will not continue to uncork with n,: ,pt c t to the health and safety of the products? Of all the new food products introduced imx. t. to marketplace products utilizing this technology are the most regulated. I think it is important to understand the process of research and development in agriculture and new agricultural product commercialization and how these two processes differ in time and funding sources. Research and Development Research does not produce instant results. New technologies are developed for major marka3 and take decades to be developed, if ever, for smaller markets. In this technology the pr( zei; includes determining how to grow a plant in a tissue culture system from plant cells. this process often differs from plant to plant. Other steps are to determine what part of a pla it is receptive to gene insertion, to acquire a useful gene and get it into a usable form, m inner= the gene, to grow and select cells that acquired the inserted gene, to use the tissue culture system o develop leaves, stalks and roots, to test the selected plants for the presence and functionality RES 462-08-January 24, 2008 Poge Hawaii Agriculture Research Center