Franken Foods: MONSANTO'S LIE OF THE CENTURY - PV SATHEESH

[Guest guest]

GMW: MONSANTO'S " LIE OF THE CENTURY " - PV SATHEESH

" GM WATCH " <info

Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:49:13 +0100

 

 

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

------

A compelling presentation on Bt Cotton in Andhra Pradesh by P V

Satheesh, Director of the Deccan Development Society.

 

EXCERPTS: " what is the story that the farmers in AP are telling us with

regard to Mahyco-Monsanto Bt hybrids? It is a story of terrible loss,

deep pain, and cold anger, leading to explosive violence and even

death... "

 

" Hundreds of farmers, who have testified in the study as well as in the

film, have repeatedly told us how the Bollgard cultivation had ruined

them totally. In the face of this reality, the claim by Mahyco Monsanto

[that farmers in Andhra Pradesh had gained five fold from Bollgard] is

an example of dark humour and can easily earn them the Lie of the

Century award. "

------

THE STUDY AND THE FILM

 

Three years ago, almost to the day, when the Deccan Development

Society[DDS] and the AP Coalition in Defence of Diversity[APCDD] began

their

research on Bt Cotton in Andhra Pradesh with a particular focus on the

cotton district of Warangal, we had no idea what we were walking into.

There was a bulldozing hype surrounding Bt Cotton that had bedazzled the

politicians and policy makers. A huge scientific lobby was painting Bt

cotton as a panacea for farmers and the environment. Corporate money

and muscle wielded a power of such magnitude that even the media had

been muzzled to a considerable extent. Huge money had poured into

creating

a dazzling aura around Bt cotton through a blitz of advertisements. It

was an unspoken axiom that there was no science other than

biotechnology and anything that challenged it was anti-science. The

civil society

in Andhra Pradesh, by and large, had very little clue about what genetic

engineering was all about.

 

In this atmosphere, anyone who tried to find out the honest truth was

labeled as a backward person and an avoidable hurdle in the path of

modernity. The APCDD and the DDS braved this hostile environment and

embarked on a quest for truth. Two courageous scientists Dr Abdul

Qayum, and

Mr Kiran Sakkhari, took up cudgels on our behalf, and went about the

job of unravelling the agro-socio-economic mystery of Bt cotton.

 

They selected a transparent and open methodology, stayed close to the

farmers, and gathered information from them on a fortnightly basis.

Their data collectors were village based grassroots researchers with a

deep

understanding of agriculture. No other research group on Bt cotton in

this country had done season-long studies, and a job as thorough as

this. Most groups came once a while after hearing of the cotton disaster,

collected data at that point of time and went back. No one stayed

continuously with farmers and farming communities to record their

changing

perceptions about Bt cotton. This makes the present study a unique one.

 

At the end of the first season, when we reported to the world the total

disaster of Bt cotton in Andhra Pradesh, one of the most famous

apologists for Genetic Engineering, Dr Kameswara Rao, went

philosophical in

his article One Swallow Does Not Make A Summer. The learned doctor

pontificated to the lesser mortals: It is only fair to wait till the

end of

the three-year period to declare Bt cotton as a success or failure. In

the meanwhile, it is certainly reasonable to assess the prospects, in a

non-judgmental way, using the commercial results and certainly not

field trial data, which have served their purpose in gaining the approval

of the GEAC. If we wait till the end of the three-year period, the

farmers themselves will come out with their assessment of the benefits

of Bt

cotton. If the farmer is not convinced, no amount of effort through

articles in Science and Nature or the whole world body of crop

biotechnologists and governments can make the farmer adopt this

technology.

 

We have waited till the end of the three years. Now the truth is out.

And with it the jury too. The jury is not composed of outsiders, but the

farmers themselves as the venerable Doctor had prescribed. And what is

the story that the farmers in AP are telling us with regard to

Mahyco-Monsanto Bt hybrids? It is a story of terrible loss, deep pain,

and cold

anger, leading to explosive violence and even death.

 

The study Bt Cotton in Andhra Pradesh: a three year assessment is a

dispassionate report that captures farmers' engagement with Bt cotton,

their resultant economics and the ultimate desperation. On the other

hand,

an associated film Bt Cotton in AP; a three year fraud, brilliantly

captures the mood and feelings of the farmers as they are led up the

garden path by the false promises of a ruthless industry. Both these are

historic documents in analysing the impact of Bt cotton in India.

 

The Monsanto Corporation makes a claim that Bt Cotton returns socio

economic benefits to smallholder farmers globally. [see Monsanto

Website]

,To evaluate this claim,, the study justifiably wanted to see how small

farmers, especially under the rainfed conditions benefited from this

scientific miracle. It therefore kept its focus on this section of

farmers.

 

And now, what does the study reveal?

 

* Mahyco-Monsanto Bt cotton, Bollgard, has failed miserably for small

farmers in Andhra Pradesh, India, in terms of yields.

 

While the three year average yield from Bollgard cotton for small

farmers, has remained at around 650 kgs per acre, the yield for small

farmers under rainfed conditions in 2005 from Bt is just about 535

kgs. The

same farmers got 150 kgs more yield from growing non Bt hybrids under

the same conditions as Bt. Therefore non-Bt has surpassed Bt in terms of

yield by nearly 30% with 10% less expense. Therefore Bt has failed

the farmers twice over in terms of yield.

 

* Bollgard Cotton did not reduce pesticide use.

 

Actually the volume of pesticide use by Bt farmers and Non Bt farmers

was so thin that it was untraceable. Bt farmers on an average bought and

used Rs. 2571 worth of pesticide while the non Bt farmers bought and

used Rs.2766 worth of pesticides over three years. The difference is

barely around 7% of the pest management costs and an invisible 2% of

their

total cultivation costs.

 

* Bollgard did not bring profit to farmers

 

The three year average tells us that the non-Bt farmers earned 60% more

than Bt farmers. In actual fact, in place of profit, Bt cotton,

especially the Mahyco Monsanto varieties, brought untold miseries to

farmers

culminating in violent street protests and the burning of seed outlets

in the city of Warangal. Farmers tied up Mahyco Monsanto

representatives in their villages and the police had to go and rescue

the hapless

salesmen.

 

* Bollgard did not reduce the cost of cultivation

Looking back, it is evident that farmers had to spend not only 3-4

times more for the Mahyco-Monsanto's proprietary Bollgard seeds but

had to

take extra care to manure, irrigate and look after their precious Bt

crop. Many farmers, especially in the rainfed areas, spent at least a

couple of thousand rupees more per acre in comparison to their non Bt

hybrids. On an average, the Bt farmers had incurred 12% more costs in

cultivating their Bt crops in comparison with their non Bt fraternity.

 

* Bollgard did not generate healthier environment.

 

Our researchers felt that a special kind of root rot was being spread

by Bollgard cotton. Farmers came out with complaints that they were not

able to grow other crops after Bt because it had infected their soil

very badly. As against this,the soil in which the farmers grew non-Bt

hybrids was extremely friendly to other crops. This is an early warning

and needs active research by soil scientists immediately.

 

On all counts, the Mahyco-Monsanto Bt hybrids had failed the farming

community in Andhra Pradesh.

But with an unimaginable audacity, the industry commissioned a study to

a market research agency [recall that in 2004 also the company had

commissioned the study to another market research agency and not to

scientists or development economists] and with its now well known data

manipulation tactics, claimed that the AP farmers had gained five fold

from

Bollgard, compared to their non Bt hybrids. Hundreds of farmers, who have

testified in the study as well as in the film, have repeatedly told us

how the Bollgard cultivation had ruined them totally. In the face of

this reality, the claim by Mahyco Monsanto is an example of dark humour

and can easily earn them the Lie of the Century award.

 

Farmers in Warangal were so vexed with this corporate distortion of

their misery that they held hostage the Mahyco Monsanto representative in

their village, took to the streets in a violent protest in the city of

Warangal, and burnt and destroyed seed stores that stocked Bollgard.

Newspapers in the district continuously reported the total ruin of tens

of thousands of acres that had planted Bollgard cotton.

 

But the company-sponsored reports did not reflect any of this reality.

They continued to play the company tunes and blow up their miniscule,

manipulated successes. Bureaucrats were bought over, official enquiries

were distorted, false data was fed to media and an unreal world under

the corporate command was created.

 

It is this atmosphere of total surrender to the industry that makes

attempts like the current study very important. They not only uphold the

dignity of independent scientific enquiry but also herald the liberation

of the scientific community from the chains of corporate sponsored

tainted- research. They also reflect the true reality of the concerns of

the farming communities and prevent these concerns from being bulldozed

by the corporate power, which in league with arrogant pseudo science,

populate the lobbies of corrupt political power.

 

I once again thank the two courageous researchers Dr Abdul Qayum and Mr

Kiran Sakkhari, who put their hearts and souls in finding out the truth

about Bt cotton from the fields and farms of small and hapless farmers

in various parts of Andhra Pradesh.

By now they have made their mark worldwide as exceptional researchers

who have the mettle in their soul to swim against fashionable currents.

My deepest gratitude goes to them. Ms Venkata Lakshmi of the

Permaculture Association of India, who co-researched the study grew in

stature as

a researcher over the last two years. Her patient interaction with

farmers unearthed priceless perceptions. I thank her and wish her a great

future in this line of research.

 

The civil society groups in these three districts especially, CROPS,

JAGRUTI, MARI, PEACE, PRAGATI, PRATIBHA, SARVODAYA, SEED, SEVA, SPACE,

SSS, SUN(P) and CSTD have been the backbone of the study. I express my

earnest appreciation for their collaboration in the study. My very

special thanks are due to Mr Murali of MARI, Warangal and Mr Damodar, the

Warangal District Convenor of APCDD, who offered unstinted support and

guidance to the study at every stage. The team of data writers [mentioned

at the end of this study] from all the collaborating NGOs, who stayed

in their villages meeting farmers at regular intervals to collect and

collate their data, deserve a huge, huge thanks.

My colleague Giridhar, Joint Director, DDS patiently provided the

logistic support all through the years and made the study possible.

 

The women filmmakers of DDS Community Media Trust have once again made

an extraordinary film called Bt Cotton in Warangal: A three year fraud.

Their previous film Why are Warangal Farmers Angry with Bt Cotton made

in 2003has now been translated into French, Spanish, Thai and German

besides English and is making waves around the world. It has also been

shown in film festivals, national and internationl. They have continued

their strides to bring out a new perspective on Bt cotton this year. To

make this film, they have travelled to Warangal month after month,

braving the scorching sun, carrying their equipment, walking miles into

farmers' fields, talking to farmers, especially women, creating a

camaraderie and generating brilliant interviews. They have filmed the

death of

Bt cotton at every stage and analysed the reasons with farmers. The

last year of their filming was led by Eedulapally Manjula and was

supported by Matoor Shakuntala, Nagwar Kavita, Ippapalle Mollamma,

Humnapur

Laxmamma, Borancha Sangamma and Pastapur Chinna Narsamma. Being small and

marginal farmers themselves, the media women of CMT have sensitively

captured the images and voices of the Bt farmers in crisis. The

brilliance and invaluableness of their effort cannot be adequately

described. I

reserve my deepest appreciation for them.

 

And finally my heart and gratitude go out to those hundreds of farmers

who spent their precious time with us in offering us information and

their perceptions on the performance of Bt cotton on their fields. Most

of them were small farmers who had seen Bt cotton as the light at the

end of the tunnel of darkness they had traversed in pesticide dominated

cotton cultivation. But it was not to be. The light that shone was an

artificial glow produced by the industry's hype. When they came out of

the tunnel and saw denser darkness surrounding them, they lost all hope

in life. It is this sense of total loss that they have shared with us.

We hope somewhere this report will have some impact in doing justice for

these farmers and liberate them from the clutches of the predatory

industrial agriculture.

 

P V Satheesh April 12, 2005

Convenor, AP Coalition in Defence of Diversity, Deccan Development Society

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

----------------