Fwd: EU Ratifies U.N. Protocol + Biotech Costs Organic Farmers

[Guest guest]

Fri, 6 Jun 2003 05:11:27 -0700

 

News Update from The Campaign

EU Ratifies U.N. Protocol + Biotech Costs Organic Farmers

 

News Update From The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods

----

 

Dear News Update Subscribers,

 

Posted below are three articles of significant interest.

 

The first two articles discuss an important development that took place

in Europe on Wednesday. The European Union Parliament ratified the

three-year-old United Nations Biosafety Protocol that regulates

international trade in genetically modified food.

 

The U.N. Biosafety Protocol, also known as the Cartagena Protocol, is a

treaty that was signed by 103 nations. It needs to be ratified by 50

countries before it goes into effect. 49 have already ratified it, so it

only needs one more.

 

The European Union is made up of 15 nations and so far less than half

have ratified the treaty independently. The action on Wednesday by the

European Union Parliament will most likely cause at least one more

nation to independently ratify the treaty. After that happens, the treaty

will go into effect three months later.

 

The United States opposes the U.N. Biosafety Protocol and never joined

the 103 nations that signed this treaty. Once enacted, U.N. Biosafety

Protocol will allow countries to legally ban genetically engineered

foods based on the " precautionary principle. "

 

U.N. BIOSAFETY PROTOCOL vs. THE WTO

 

As you are probably aware, a few weeks ago, the United States filed a

World Trade Organization (WTO) case over the European Union's moratorium

on genetically engineered foods. However, once the U.N. Biosafety

Protocol gets one more nation to ratify it, three months later a country

will have legal authority to ban genetically engineered foods.

 

This is a case of two international treaties possibly conflicting with

each other. So the global food fight over genetically engineered foods

rages on.

 

ORGANIC FOODS COST MORE BECAUSE OF BIOTECH FOODS

 

The third article posted below is titled " Biotech Revolution Costs

Organic Farmers. " This Associated Press article appeared this week in

many of our nation's leading newspapers.

 

The article does a great job of pointing out that the organic industry

and consumers are paying extra as a result of the wide spread planting

of genetically engineered crops in the United States. The expense of

keeping organic foods from becoming contaminated by biotech crops is

real and costly.

 

HOW TO REVERSE THIS GROWING EXPENSE

 

Although the article does not discuss it, the best way to stop the

growth of biotech foods is to require mandatory labeling on genetically

engineered foods. Once genetically engineered foods are labeled, most

consumers will not buy them. (Once labeled, consumers will start asking

questions such as " Have these products been safety tested on humans? "

and they will learn the answer to that question is " no! " )

 

If consumers don't buy genetically engineered foods, farmers won't grow

them. And if biotech crops are not being grown, they won't continue to

contaminate organic agriculture.

 

Hopefully this important national article will cause more companies that

sell organic foods and consumers who buy them to get more active in the

effort to label genetically engineered foods. As long as genetically

engineered crops continue to be grown on a wide scale basis, the

contamination of organic foods will continue. The effort to keep them

pure will become more difficult and expensive.

 

Craig Winters

Executive Director

The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods

 

The Campaign

PO Box 55699

Seattle, WA 98155

Tel: 425-771-4049

Fax: 603-825-5841

E-mail: label

Web Site: http://www.thecampaign.org

 

Mission Statement: " To create a national grassroots consumer campaign

for the purpose of lobbying Congress and the President to pass

legislation that will require the labeling of genetically engineered

foods in the United States. "

 

***************************************************************

 

EU Ratifies U.N. Biosafety Protocol

 

..c The Associated Press

 

STRASBOURG, France (AP) - The European Union Parliament on Wednesday

ratified a three-year-old United Nations biosafety protocol that

regulates international trade in genetically modified food.

 

The protocol lets countries ban imports of a genetically modified

product if they feel there is not enough scientific evidence the product

is safe and requires exporters to label shipments containing genetically

altered commodities such as corn or cotton.

 

The EU Parliament's move opens the way for EU governments to give the

U.N. accord, negotiated three years ago in Montreal, legal effect

throughout the 15-nation bloc later this month.

 

To date, only Denmark, Austria, Spain, Sweden and the Netherlands have

ratified the U.N. agreement. Other nations first wanted the protocol to

have the blessing of the EU.

 

The United States, a major producer of biotech crops, did not sign the

protocol, saying it was opposed to labeling. It had also fought import

bans.

 

EU environment commissioner Margot Wallstrom praised the assembly's

decision. She said it ``confirms that determination of the EU to fully

implement the biosafety protocol.''

 

The U.N. protocol is expected to come into force in the autumn. Fifty

nations have to ratify the agreement which was signed by 103 countries.

Only 49 have so far done so.

 

Jonas Sjoestedt, a Swedish Left member of the EU assembly, said the

protocol's endorsement by the European Parliament will help the EU

counter critics that Europe does not want to deal with genetically

altered crops.

 

``The new rules make clear that trade in GMO's, which are products of a

recently developed technology and may carry dangers to human health or

the environment, must be based on the precautionary principle,''

Sjoestedt said.

 

That principle lets developing nations balance public health against

economic benefits and lets them ban food containing GMO's from entering

their country.

 

``This legislation should help the EU to counter recent accusations by

the U.S administration that the EU is to blame for the African rejection

of GM food aid last year,'' Sjoestedt said.

 

``By agreeing these strict new rules, the EU is helping to empower

importing countries to choose whether they will accept GM imports.''

 

06/04/03 22:18 EDT

 

***************************************************************

 

EU assembly backs compliance with GMO trade treaty

 

 

STRASBOURG, France, June 4 (Reuters) - EU lawmakers backed a bill on

Wednesday that should bring about the ratification throughout the bloc

of an international treaty regulating the export of genetically modified

organisms (GMOs).

 

GMOs are a sensitive issue in the EU. The bloc has a moratorium on the

growing of GMO crops, which has now been challenged at the World Trade

Organisation by the United States.

 

Under the rules adopted by the European Parliament, no EU country will

be able to export GMOs without the formal consent of importing

countries, after the exporter has provided detailed information on the

shipment.

 

It means the bloc will comply with the Cartagena Protocol, a treaty that

needs ratification from just one more country -- 49 states have ratified

it already -- and then three months' breathing space before it can come

into force.

 

" The European Union has been a key player in the international

negotiations and we are now sending a clear signal that we are able to

honour our commitments, " European Environment Commissioner Margot

Wallstrom said in a statement.

 

Seven EU countries, including France and Spain, have already ratified

the Cartagena Protocol and Parliament's vote will now oblige the

remaining eight states to adapt their national laws accordingly. This is

expected to lead to their eventual ratification of the protocol, which

could then enter into force.

 

Under the protocol -- named after the Colombian city where discussions

first started -- countries intending to trade in GMOs must inform a

database in the Canadian city of Montreal where the treaty was finally

agreed.

 

Notification includes individual cargoes which must be clearly marked.

Any country considering importing material from that country can access

the database for information on the cargo in question, and decide

whether or not to take it.

 

06/04/03 10:34 ET

 

***************************************************************

 

Biotech Revolution Costs Organic Farmers

 

By PAUL ELIAS

..c The Associated Press

 

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Fig Newmans cost more today than a year ago.

 

That's because the organic cookie maker Newman's Own now buys its corn

syrup from Austria, since it no longer trusts domestic corn syrup to be

free of genetically modified organisms. The corn syrup from Austria,

which bans the planting of genetically modified crops, costs the Santa

Cruz, Calif., company more and has forced it to hike its prices.

 

It's not alone.

 

The biotechnology revolution has always given organic farmers and their

customers pause for concern. Now, it's costing them money.

 

The Organic Farming Research Foundation said about 11 percent of the

farmers responding to a recent survey said they have been DNA-testing

crops for the presence of genetically modified organisms. Others said

they've undertaken more costly planting processes or have lost sales

over concerns their organic crops were corrupted by genetically modified

organisms.

 

It's all adding up to cost increases for organic foods, which command

premium prices because of their promise to be free of biotechnology,

pesticides and other unnatural tinkering. Worse, some U.S. farmers are

losing sales to European competitors who can better ensure their crops

are free of genetically engineered organisms.

 

``It's the bane of the organic industry,'' said Nell Newman of Newman's

Own.

 

A tiny fraction of farmers, including the Rosmann Family Farm in Harlan,

Iowa, said they've discovered trace amounts of genetically modified

organisms cross-pollinated or otherwise mingled with their organically

grown crops. Those are potentially devastating discoveries, because

organic consumers generally demand that the higher-priced food they buy

be grown free of any biotechnological influence.

 

``We will be in trouble if we can't differentiate our product from the

rest of the market,'' said Ron Rosmann. ``It's a major concern.''

 

Rosmann said an organic tortilla maker complained last year that about 1

percent of the farm's corn shipment was genetically modified. The

tortilla maker used the corn, but wants the farm to do a better job this

year of ensuring biotech-free shipments.

 

So Rosmann will harvest his corn later this year in hopes of avoiding

cross-pollination with biotech varieties, which are being planted in

increasing amounts in the United States. Last year, U.S. farmers planted

genetically modified crops - mostly soy and corn - on 92 million acres.

 

In 1996, the first year genetically modified crops were commercially

available, about 4.3 million acres were under biotechnology cultivation

worldwide.

 

Most crops are engineered to be resistant to weed-killing chemicals.

Farmers who plant genetically engineered plants argue that their crops

help reduce the amount of herbicides used in their fields, saving them

money and better protecting the environment.

 

Organic farmers and their consumers argue the long-term health and

environmental risks of biotechnology haven't been properly studied. As

more biotech crops get planted, more consumers are turning to organic

produce.

 

But Mother Nature and the way food gets to market are creating

fundamental problems for organic farmers.

 

Nearly half the organic farmers polled by the Organic Farming Research

Foundation said they fear the seeds they are buying are tainted with

genetically modified organisms. Another 42 percent of responding farmers

said they fear ``pollen drift'' from genetically modified crops will

contaminate their harvests.

 

Rosmann's corn contamination highlights a growing and little publicized

problem for organic farmers. Some of their crops have indeed been

contaminated with genetically modified organisms, something only the

most savvy consumer knows.

 

Without genetic tests that cost more than $300 each, consumers can't be

completely assured their organic products are 100 percent GMO free.

 

Meanwhile, the $10 billion-a-year U.S. organic food industry faces

increasingly skeptical European customers who won't tolerate any

percentage of genetically engineered crops.

 

``There's a lot of mental anguish,'' said Erica Walz of the Organic

Farming Research Foundation.

 

On the Net:

 

Organic Farming Research Foundation: http://www.ofrf.org

 

06/05/03 15:51 EDT

 

***************************************************************

 

If you would like to comment on this News Update, you can do so at the

forum section of our web site at: http://www.thecampaign.org/forums

 

***************************************************************

 

 

 

---------

 

 

 

Gettingwell- / Vitamins, Herbs, Aminos, etc.

 

To , e-mail to: Gettingwell-

Or, go to our group site: Gettingwell

 

 

 

Free online calendar with sync to Outlook.