Pushmepullyou Down on the Farm

There are so many forces pummeling our ecosystem these days. As scientists in the agricultural world play with creating new strains of plants and even animal life by “genetic engineering,” consumers are pushing back. The thought of eating genetically modified food products is somewhat disturbing in an era of “natural foods” and a general rebellion among the anti-obese community against processed foods of all kinds. Food companies, on the other hand, want to increase crop yields, insect and herbicide resistance and consumer-pleasing characteristics that increase their profitability… and genetic engineering allows them to pursue that path. But since there is so much consumer fear associated with “messin’ with nature,” these companies would prefer to avoid having to label their foodstuffs as genetically modified (GMO).

In Europe last May, after demonstration in 436 cities worldwide, Monsanto threw in the towel, at least in Europe, telling a German newspaper, “‘We've concluded that there is not a wide acceptance at the moment. We haven't made any progress [in getting consumers to accept GMOs] in years,’ said a spokesman of Monsanto to a German Newspaper. Growing resistance and consumers and farmers who refuse to buy the genetically modified foods have led to this result… Aspokesman of the German Ministry stated that ‘The promises of the GM industry have not come true for European agriculture, nor for the agriculture in developing and emerging economies…

“Eight countries of the European union have already banned Monsanto GMO corn and similar crops and seeds. The opposition has been particularly fierce in Germany which caused its government to make strict regulations to protect the country from ecological degeneration. Other countries banning Monsanto GMO are: Austria, Bulgaria, France, Greece, Hungary, Luxembourg and Poland.” Thebestrawfood.com.

Meanwhile, back at the American farm, large parts of Kansas and West Texas have been in an extended drought for years, and California, which imposed significant cut water supplies from the north to the south, is about to impose major water rationing since this state is experiencing the lowest rainfall/snowfall in decades. As global climate change adds severe and prolonged drought to areas that used to be America’s breadbasket, the question being asked among the agricultural community is whether in addition to more efficient irrigation technologies (not enough to fix the problem), the biggest proper solution might be the introduction of entirely new strains of crops that can grow in such austere conditions.

Writing an opinion piece in the February 2^nd New York Times, Jayson Lusk, professor of agricultural economics at Oklahoma State University and Henry I. Miller, a physician and a fellow at the Hoover Institution believe that the genetic alteration into a new strain of drought-resistant crops may be the only hope for these once-productive agricultural regions. First, a little background on U.S. grain GMO crops: “Three crops — corn, soybeans and wheat — account for a vast majority of the value of America’s agricultural crop output. But wheat is different in one important respect. While more than 90 percent of the nation’s corn and soybean acres are now planted with seeds genetically engineered to resist insects, herbicides or both, there is not a single acre of genetically engineered wheat being grown commercially in the United States.

“Wheat farmers have suffered as a result, as have consumers of bread and pasta, who have been paying higher prices than they might have because fewer and fewer acres are planted in wheat. Without the benefits of the newer molecular techniques of genetic engineering, the nation’s wheat industry will continue to struggle against other commodities that have adopted biotechnology, and against the drought conditions out West. All of this is happening as the planet’s population increases and global wheat demand expands in response.

“Why has wheat lagged behind? One reason is that, back in the mid-1990s, corn and soybean farmers avidly embraced the nascent biotechnology revolution, snatching up new, genetically engineered seed varieties. But wheat farmers balked at the potentially higher prices of these new seeds and feared that anti-genetic engineering views held by some of our trading partners would hurt exports.

“Today, it’s easy to see why corn and soybean farmers made the switch. Crop yields have increased and farmers have been able to reduce their use of chemical insecticides and shift to less toxic herbicides to control weeds. They’ve also made more money. Over the same period, the amount of land planted in wheat has dropped by about 20 percent, and although yields have increased, productivity growth has been lower than for the crops genetically engineered with molecular techniques….

“Much of the nation’s wheat crop comes from a section of the central plains that sits atop the Ogallala Aquifer, which is rapidly being depleted. The direst warnings suggest that at current rates of use, in 50 years only 30 percent of its water will remain. Farmers who have relied on the aquifer may face tougher restrictions on use or be forced to change their farming practices.” NY Times. We may not care as much about feed crops and corn being used to create ethanol as a gasoline additive, but wheat… well… that evokes a different emotional response. Two completely divergent forces pulling on consumers. Both are critical social policies but are truly at odds with each other. What are your thoughts?

I’m Peter Dekom, and we are going to be facing these kinds of Hobson’s choices for decades to come.