Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0728.050 2000-2002 Jack Kelly P.O. Box 917 Captain Cook, Hawaii 96704 Konajack@earthlink.net September 25, 2002 ^ v II(iiu I• ~l ~___...____""ter }~z---..,art-_. To: The Hawaii County Council - ,r_~ . RE: Resolution 236-02 Aloha, My name is Jack Kelly. I'm a coffee farmer in Honaunau, a past presiuent of the Kona Coffee Council. My company, Kona Jack's Coffee wholesales both green and roasted coffee in Hawaii as well as the mainland U.S. I am intimately aware that even minute fluctuations in the Kona Coffee market can spell financial disaster for Kona coffee farmers. Even the hint that traditional Kona Coffee varieties have been or have t?~e possibility of being genetically altered could spell disaster for the Kona coffee market. The Specialty Coffee Association of America' Sustainability Committee has stated that a genetically modified coffee is not consistent with the SCAA's definition of quality. Quality is the key to the success of Kona Coffee. Farmers in Kona have worked diligently over the past decade to mandate high standards for Kona Coffee through mandatory certification of green coffee and federal registration of the name "Kona" to insure that coffee labeled as Kona comes from Kona. What stake do the people who are proposing testing for genetically altered coffee have in the Kona Coffee industry? I know we have plenty at stake. The proposed resolution is very specific to Kona coffee and the Kona cuffee belt and yet has raised an outcry among those promoting genetic alteration of food crops~~ s a savior to the agriculture industry in Hawaii and elsewhere. Why? Because those who pii mote GMO products stand on very shaky ground. , In our world today, we can see two distinct systems of agriculture emerging. One, as is well represented on Hawaii Island, is a system of small independent ~~nd family farms that produce natural and organic foods. These farms rely on the management skills of their owner/farmers, who carry a sense of personal pride in the nutritional quality of the foods that they produce. These farmers are intimately integrated into the local economy. The other is a multinational industrial agriculture system that is managed by the executives of corporations that genetically convert plants and animals through (~o~= ~~a 1i~?1e 15To.. - ~ , Ref. ~o: • biotechnology. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) such as gene-spliced soybeans and corn have, in recent years, become common ingredients in a vast variety of products, including snack foods, baby foods, and cereals. Farmers grow and harvest these crops on command of the corporate managers. Biotechnology corporations control farmers and what they produce by the use of patents on genetically engineered seed stock. The USDA has gifted industry giants such as Monsanto and DuPont with the "terminator" gene, which causes seeds to become sterile after one season. These companies are now able to dictate seed prices, growing practices, marketing and other terms of management. Although the GMOs produced by biotech firms are heavily touted for a number of benefits, such as herbicide resistance (the so-called "Roundup-Readygo" hybrids), disease resistance, and high yields, the number of disastrous consequences involving GMOs are mounting. Last year, much of the Iowa corn crop was lost when traditional varieties were contaminated with transgenic StarLink corn, a product of France-based Aventis CropScience, and was deemed by the UDSA to be unfit for human consumption. The USDA has agreed to buy the contaminated corn to ensure that it doesn't get planted, at a cost to taxpayers of an estimated $20 million. In Scotland, pollen from a transgenic herbicide-resistant oilseed rape cabbage crop contaminated a farmer's traditional crop over a mile away. In the Mississippi Delta, five thousand acres of cotton inserted with the Round-up Readygo gene was lost entirely, the cotton bolls deformed and falling off. The situation has become so serious that a broad coalition of organic and sustainable farming interests including Greenpeace, Farm Verified Organic, the International Federation of Organic Farming Movements, and a number of other organizations are pursuing legal action against Monsanto and other responsible parties, alleging that GMO contamination has altered the integrity of organic commodities and processed foods. Against substantial opposition from environmental activist and local farmers, the Rainbow papaya, developed by UH and Cornell researchers, was introduced in Puna as a way of "saving" the local industry from the papaya ringspot virus., Instead, farmers who did as recommended by the state Department of Agriculture, cutting down their non-GM papayas and planting Rainbow, found themselves facing financial ruin. The lucrative Japanese papaya market refused to accept the GM variety and many consumers in the islands rejected them as well. At one point, the price for Rainbow papayas plummeted to less than one-tenth the price of Kapoho Solo, the most popular non-GM variety. Currently, average prices for the Rainbow still lag behind, mostly due the higher prices commanded by Kapoho Solo for export to Japan. And now there is a new papaya threat, the black spot fungus, asperisporiuni c«ricc~e, that has attacked Hawaii Island papayas. According to farmer Ernesto Tagalicud, the transgenic Rainbow variety is significantly more susceptible than the traditional Solo variety to the blackspot fungus. Are biotechnology companies just creating new problems for farmers? While many other countries have followed a cautious approach to GMOs, UH and Hawaii's governmental agencies have seemingly embraced the biotech industry wholeheartedly. Governor Cayetano has made several glowing speeches praising biotechnology as "an important source of quality jobs and prosperity for the state", while Hawaii's scientific community, with UH at the forefront, has positioned itself as a major player in the field. There have been over 1,200 field tests for GMOs applied for in Hawaii, many of them for corn, but also rice, anthuriums, dendrobiums, and coffee without caffeine. The prospect of transgenic non-caffeineated coffee being planted on Hawaii Island and contaminating the $9.3 million Kona coffee crop (and that's the pre-roasted value) is keeping Kona coffee farmers up at night. Thomas Jefferson recognized that the basis of true representative government is the small, independent farmer, and the farm-based community, because these are able to survive without the help (or interference) of the state. Increasingly, the independent farmers of Hawaii Island, feeling that GMOs are being forced down their throats, wish the state would refocus its efforts toward finding ways to strengthen Hawaii's agricultural base from within, rather than relying on the "Big Brother" mentality of the biotech firms. We, the farmers of Kona, are committed to maintaining the quality and integrity of our special crop. You council members, the elected representatives of the people should respond accordingly and adopt Resolution 236-02 without further delay.