Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0271.217 2012-2014 COUNTY CLERK COUNTY OF HAWAI't IVED fur *** Hawaii Time 3 U By__twi _ Farmers Date '1-i- tom, Union i FIUI O UNITED tt,ORM Hawaii Farmers Union United FAMILY AGRI UETURf Big island•$aui•iioiekai•Oahn•Kanal KONA CHAPTER HAWAII FARMERS UNION UNITED P.O.Box 5436 Kailua-Kona HI 96745-5436 The Honorable J. Yoshimoto, Chair June 29,2013 Hawaii County Council TESTIMONY IN SUPPORT OF BILL 79 — RELATING TO GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS David Case Aloha Chairman Yoshimoto and Council Members, President I am writing on behalf of the members of the Kona Chapter of the Hawaii Farmers Union United ("HFUU"). HFUU is a state chapter of the National Framers Union, the oldest organization of small- scale farm owners in the United States. At a recent special meeting of its members the Kona Steve Sakala Chapter listened to Hawaii County Councilwomen Margaret Wille's explanation of Bill 79 and heard Vice-President from farmers and others both supportive and opposed to GMO cropping. At the conclusion of the meeting the Kona Chapter members voted unanimously to support Bill 79, which would prudently restrict GMO cropping in Hawaii County. Many members of the National Farmers Union raise GMO crops, and neither the National Farmers Diane Heinlein Union, HFUU, nor its Kona Chapter oppose GMO research per se. Our primary concern is the Secretary family and hundreds of other small-scale farms that are the heart and soul of Hawaii County's farming economy. Many of these farms are certified organic farms with crops selling into high value markets that require continued organic certification. Whatever the science behind GMO crops, it is uncontested that if GMO crops contaminate organic crops, the organic crops loose their organic Kurt chweickhard certification and the markets on which organic farmers and those who process and sell their Treasurer products depend for their livelihood. GMO contamination could also deprive even Hawaii' non-organic crops of vital foreign markets in Japan, Korea and the European Union to name a few. As reported in the May 31, 2013 online Hazel Beck issue of Forbes magazine the recent Japanese rejection of GMO contaminated Oregon wheat has Member now led to suspensions of American wheat imports in Korea and perhaps the European Union. Open field production of any GMO crop runs the same risk for all non-GMO crops in Hawaii County. HFUU's Kona Chapter supports Bill 79 because it strikes the right balance that protects the right of John Giblin, Hawaii County's hundreds of small-scale farmers to make a living while taking a precautionary Member approach to the introduction of GMO crops. In 2008 Hawaii County passed an outright ban on GMO cropping of taro and coffee. As with coffee and taro, Hawaii County should act now to protect the economies of all of its crops. Mahalo Franz Webe« HFUU . �' - yT R Member //� 2-7/. ail Comm. No. Ref. To: P/P-5 M TL Ref. Dote ii , LU13 David Case, President The Hawaii Farmers Union advocates for the sovereign right of farmers to create and sustain vibrant and prosperous agricultural communities for the benefit of all Hawaii through cooperation,education and legislation. • Hawaii - Farmers , Union Hawaii Various Union United cr= HAWAII FARMERS UNION UNITED 1768 Kalawi PI. Wailuku Maui HI 96793 Tie Honorable J. Yoshirrioto, Chair June 29,2013 Hawaii Co..Anty Council TESTIMONY IN SUPPORT OF BILL 79 — RELATING TO GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS Aloha Chairman Yosh,moto and Council Mernpeas, •,,irirert Vino Artoo I am writing on behalf e the Roard of D recters of the Hawa Farmers Union United iHFUU) ir forma support of the position taken by our Kona Chapter in favor of Councilwoman Margaret Wiles 131179 to regulate GMO cropping in I lawaii County I was also present at the Kona Chapter membership meeting where Cot Wile ilLmell briefed us or the Bill and it was fatly debuted. sidert As tae Kona Chapter's etter notes, HFUU does not oppose GMO search oe-se We du, however: support the right of all farmers to farm so long as new ways of farming are not at the expense of already existing farms and farming economies. There is no debate that GMO Cr3ritamHation of organic crops destroys their organic certifieaaon But it deesrl't stop tac-e as thc recently reported Japanese refusal to accept a shipment of sisactsa, kass GMO contarabated. nor-organic American wheat demonstrates. The plain fact that GMO donterr?nation depaves organic crops of their organic certification and any market and el crops of'..mportant foretr markets such as Japan. Korea and the European tinier, nev Organic crops are new one of the fastest growing segments of acrtultural production Trasaaaa are these markets and tae farms that depert on them shou'd not be jeooard zed by a ttdi technology that requires further research to determine what conditions, if any, ander which it can coexist with organic farrrang Even Hawaii's non-organic crops would be denied vital foreign markets f they become GMO contaminated, which could pose a peananent barrier to the export of many of HawaVs unique agricultural pandacts. Bill /9 Th4wri 1°;wrf takes a proper"precautionary approach to this critical eco-.0-ilia issue. The H23,Ndi 'oterner Farmers Un'on Un ted arges the Hawaii Couaty Cowl& to appreve this legislatinn, aels Mahalo, HAWAI FAR VF."R Tz:1) Vincent tvl-n2 President r rume n.prtim reol It7ePrriqr, :r: gAliortri rjelm, ;;t.;* theberw,1: fkiha,7 r:e 1.01";'CL Iff 1.17;54.7rfr.fri Forbes online magazine (May 31, 2013 @ 3:02 pm) Consulted June 28, 2013 Illegal Genetically Modified Wheat Found In Oregon Farm: Should We Be Worried? By Nadia Arumugam Unlike specially developed herbicide-tolerant and insecticide- resistant corn, cotton, and soy varieties grown prolifically in the United States, genetically modified wheat has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. In fact, GM wheat isn't approved anywhere in the world. Despite this, a farmer in eastern Oregon found some errant wheat growing in an 8o-acre field in which it wasn't supposed to be growing (much like a weed) and when he tried to kill it using an herbicide known as glyphosate or "Roundup," it held its own. Puzzled, the unnamed farmer sent a sample of the persistent plants to a lab at Oregon State University. Upon testing, researchers found them to contain the Roundup-resistant gene revealing that the plants had in fact been genetically engineered. The Agriculture Department confirmed this finding on Wednesday. HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? The genesis of the GM wheat is no mystery. Monsanto MON_+0.05%, the St. Louis-based agricultural biotech giant and the world's biggest seed developer formulated the herbicide Roundup in 1974 spearheading its weed management program. In 1996, the company introduced Roundup Ready soybeans specially created to use in tandem with its weed killer. Roundup Ready corn followed in 1998. Currently, Monsanto has its patented genes inserted into approximately 95 percent of all soybeans and 85 percent of all corn grown in the United States, controlling about 90 percent of seed genetics in the country. It is no surprise then that the company was keen to develop wheat that would thrive in fields sprayed with Roundup. Between 1998 and 2005, it field-trialed such resistant seeds in 16 states, including Oregon. (Reuters reports that there were eight field trials of Monsanto's GMO wheat in Oregon from 1999 to 2001.) Nonetheless, Monsanto didn't pursue the GM wheat project and didn't seek approval to commercialize the seeds. In part, this was because of 1 opposition from American farmers who were concerned that it would adversely affect global wheat exports since there is widespread global resistance to GM cereals. What is something of a conundrum, however, is how and why wheat from a growing program that was discontinued nine years ago, that's about 500 million acres of wheat ago, according to Monsanto, has shown up only now in a field in Oregon? The best case scenario is that rogue seeds were carried by wind from former test fields and by some inexplicable natural phenomena happened to land and grow just in this one field. A worse case scenario is that seeds have been carried intermittently over the years and wheat fields have been contaminated with small amounts of GM wheat undetected for up to a decade. Then there's the worst case scenario, for Monsanto, certainly; GM seeds routinely mixed up with conventional seeds through human error. HOW BAD IS THIS? From a health and safety perspective there's likely nothing to be concerned about. The FDA actually reviewed the manipulated wheat a decade ago and found it to be safe for both food and animal feed. Then there's also the fact that GM corn and soy engineered with the same Roundup gene are rife in our agricultural system — although in these instances these commodities are used in animal feed. From an export perspective, on the other, this could be bad. Very bad. The United States is the world's biggest exporter of wheat and many of its trading partners are fiercely averse to GM wheat. There's no evidence or indication that the GM wheat has so far contaminated commercial wheat supplies but this hasn't stopped other countries from taking severe precautions. Japan, the second biggest importer of U.S. wheat, after Mexico, has already cancelled part of a contract to buy western white wheat, and has suspended imports of both that variety and of feed wheat, according to Reuters. South Korea, which last year imported 1.2 million tonnes of U.S. wheat for food, and 1.2 million tonnes for feed, has also suspended some shipments. As for Europe,just today, the European Union encouraged member states to test certain shipments. With its 27 member states, the EU imports in excess of 1 million tonnes American wheat annually. 2 The FU's consumer protection office issued this statement: "The Commission is following carefully the presence of this non-authorized GM wheat in Oregon in order to ensure that European consumers are protected from any unauthorized GM presence and make sure that the EU zero tolerance for such GM events is implemented." Should government tests determine that shipments of wheat have indeed contained GM grain, this crisis will no doubt reach fever pitch. Who else should be worried? Organic farmers. In the last few years, corn-growing farms that are certified organic by the United States Department of Agriculture have reported ncreasing levels of GMO contamination of their organic crop. This has seriously compromised their potential to sell to organic crop buyers since "organic" corn, by definition, cannot contain any engineered grain. Growers have also experience similar problems with soybean, though to a much lesser degree. Soy beans are self-pollinating plants,but there is still some potential for cross pollination. In 2011, a group of over 60 organic and non-organic farmers, seed businesses, and agricultural trade organizations across the country asked the courts to protect them against Monsanto if any of the farms or member farmers become unintentionally contaminated. (The case, which was filed in federal court in April 2011, was thrown out in February 2012, not even a month after the first hearing. It is currently being heard in the Court of Appeals in the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., according to The Texas Observer.) If GM wheat takes a hold beyond the 80-acre field in Oregon, there is little that an organic farmer can do to stop a fleck of GM pollen or a vagrant GM seed from being tossed by a gust of wind onto his land and, ultimately infiltrating his crop.