Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USDA will not take action in case of GMO alfalfa contamination
Reuters ^ | September 17, 2013 | Carey Gillam

Posted on 09/23/2013 8:17:27 AM PDT by opentalk

The detection of a small amount of genetically modified material in a Washington state farmer's non-GMO alfalfa crop constitutes a "commercial issue" only and does not warrant any government action, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said on Tuesday.

The Washington state farmer had complained in late August to state agricultural officials that his alfalfa hay had been rejected for export sale because of the presence of a genetically modified trait that makes the crop resistant to herbicide.

The event triggered a wave of concern from consumer and agricultural groups who have fought the government for nearly a decade to keep biotech alfalfa from contaminating conventional and organic supplies.

Crop experts have warned that the confirmation of contamination threatens U.S. sales of alfalfa feedstock to many Asia nations who reject GMOs, and some are encouraging farmers to test every bag of seed they buy before they plant.

But USDA said the detection of Monsanto Co's patented Roundup Ready herbicide-tolerant trait in the Washington farmer's non-GMO alfalfa crop should be addressed by the marketplace and not the government.

(Excerpt) Read more at mobile.reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: alfalfa; corruptusda; exports; farmers; foreignmarkets; gmo; monsanto; monsantoboughtfda; roundup; usda; wheat

1 posted on 09/23/2013 8:17:27 AM PDT by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: opentalk
Monsanto should sue him for theft.

</sarcasm>

2 posted on 09/23/2013 8:18:45 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (When your policy is to rob Peter to pay Paul, you can count on enthusiastic support from Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: opentalk

The USDA is probably the single most sold-out department in the federal government.


3 posted on 09/23/2013 8:19:12 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Will Monsanto Destroy Another Crop?

The U.S. wheat industry was nearly brought to its knees after the discovery of a genetically modified strain Monsanto (NYSE: MON ) had tested years ago was inexplicably found growing in an Oregon farmer's field. Because most of the rest of the world rejects GM wheat and the wheat from the Pacific Northwest is mostly targeted for export, the ramifications of the discovery were massive.

Now it's deja vu all over again. A Washington State farmer had his alfalfa crop rejected by a broker after it tested positive for the presence of genetic modification. The implications for this recurrence are just as profound as they were for wheat.

4 posted on 09/23/2013 8:23:11 AM PDT by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

They probably will.

They HAVE successfully sued small-time corn farmers for theft because pollen from Monsanto fields blew into the fields of farmers trying to grow heritage corns and perverted their crops.

Should be the other way around. Those bastards should be required to confine their mutant stuff away from natural crops. But they have the teams of $10,000 an hour lawyers, and their government friends, so the little guy doesn’t have a chance against the behemoth.


5 posted on 09/23/2013 8:29:17 AM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

There is no “probably” about it. They will destroy this lowly peasant farmer. How dare he steal the property of his masters!


6 posted on 09/23/2013 8:38:23 AM PDT by antidisestablishment (Mahound delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: antidisestablishment

Yeah, I don’t often think about this subject, but when I do, it makes me furious.


7 posted on 09/23/2013 8:42:25 AM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: opentalk

Genetically modified Alfalfa?...........

8 posted on 09/23/2013 8:50:30 AM PDT by Red Badger (It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong. .....Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

Me too! The subject seems to be a bit of a quandary for some conservatives, but only the low information types. Monsanto and its ilk are the epitome of crony capitalism in all her whorish glory.

And like McCarthy to the leftist, anyone who even questions the logic of their potentially destroying the essence of life and liberty is nothing but an ignorant, brutish Luddite.


9 posted on 09/23/2013 8:51:21 AM PDT by antidisestablishment (Mahound delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

As long as the wind blows and insects pollinate there will be no way to stop one crop from being contaminated from another.


10 posted on 09/23/2013 9:20:43 AM PDT by Venturer ( cowardice posturing as tolerance =political correctness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: opentalk

the only way to ensure that an alfalfa hay field does not become contaminated by the RR gene is to isolate the field at least five miles from the closest RR alfalfa field and to cut the hay before the alfalfa flowers. Maintaining purity is in all practicality impossible unless the entire county prohibits any RR alfalfa production as does the Imperial Valley in CA. Additionally, there has to be a 5 mile buffer from the county line. Individual growers have individual cropping systems with respect to quality of ground and crop rotation. Bees carry the pollen that cause the cross contamination, so either eliminate the bee industry or the Roundup Ready alfalfa or eventually all alfalfa fields will become contaminated by the RR gene. One can soon thank Monsanto for taking over the entire alfalfa seed production in the US.


11 posted on 09/23/2013 9:21:12 AM PDT by drypowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

They probably will. It has happened when other GMO crops pollinated non-GMO crops. The contaminated crop was considered copyright infringement, even though the contamination was NOT desired and occurred in nature.


12 posted on 09/23/2013 9:28:55 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: opentalk
 photo Borlaug.jpg

To many ignorant people, this man represents evil. But then, most people don't even know who he is.

Technological illiteracy and ignorance. I blame public education.

13 posted on 09/23/2013 9:46:35 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: opentalk

Genetic material is a lot more diffusing than people think. It will be fun watching the “bright line” fade away, and seeing the Euroweenies run in circles.


14 posted on 09/23/2013 9:54:16 AM PDT by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

Wow! Really? Gosh!

That was the basis for my initial rant. If Monsanto wishes to keep control of their proprietary genetic strains, then they should keep THEIR crops hermetically sealed, not expect the small farmer to keep HIS natural crops sealed.

If you are a breeder of champion horses or dogs, or cattle or whatever, and don’t want to have your horses genetics shared in an unplanned way with the neighborhood nags, mutts and cows, then keep them fenced in.


15 posted on 09/23/2013 9:58:40 AM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

Do you have a reference to a specific case where the claim of wind driven cross-pollination turned out to be truthful?


16 posted on 09/23/2013 10:09:39 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

Not off hand.


17 posted on 09/23/2013 10:13:44 AM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mase
Not the same

Hybrid Seeds Vs GMOs

In both open-pollinated and hybrid seeds,we have always been breeding crops that were genetically able to breed,like two types of stone fruit,or two varieties of squash,or two breeds of dog. But,unlike open pollinated seed selection or hybridization, GMO technology allows us to “play God” in a way that even Mother Nature hasn’t dared.

Today,with sophisticated and very expensive lab techniques (like retroviruses and gene guns),we can now manipulate and combine the DNA of species that could never ,ever breed in nature—like fish and tomatoes,Brazil nuts and soybeans,or bacteria and corn.

link

regardless, the farmer's crop was rejected for export sale because of the presence of GMO

18 posted on 09/23/2013 10:32:47 AM PDT by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Monsanto should sue him for theft.

No sarcasm, they probably will.

19 posted on 09/23/2013 11:55:29 AM PDT by bgill (This reply was mined before it was posted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Some people may be interested to know who Monsanto’s # 1 lawyer is....Philip Perry. Husband of Liz Cheney, running for senate in Wyoming.


20 posted on 09/23/2013 6:34:58 PM PDT by B4Ranch (AGENDA: Grinding America Down ----- <<http://vimeo.com/63749370)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mase

You mean my hero, Norman Borlaug. I just heard a guy, a ‘scientist’, talking about overpopulation and how we will be going hungry soon. I laughed and thought of Julian Simon and Norman Borlaug. Is it true that wheat crops are the highest bushel/acre ever?


21 posted on 09/27/2013 9:51:43 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
I love the guy too. He was a true and gifted scientist, a staunch conservative, a guy that never gave in, and a wrestler. Could there possibly be a better resume? When you read about his life, and what he had to overcome on a personal level - combined with what he did (and overcame) on a professional level - it is truly inspiring.

I had the opportunity to meet him once at an ACSH fundraiser many years ago. First class guy and a firm believer in the benefits of bio-engineering. Today, for some unknown reason, that's referred to as GMO. Borlaug would have some very unkind words for the Monsanto bashers and GMO opponents on these threads.

Of course, he was one of America's greatest scientists ever, won a Nobel when it meant something, and saved more than a billion people from death by starvation by genetically modifying food. So what the hell would he know compared to some internet jockeys that never passed biology 101 and basic chemistry?

22 posted on 09/28/2013 6:25:51 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: opentalk
Bio-engineering uses the exact same genetic engineering techniques that Mother Nature uses. As a matter of fact, every technique that scientists use in the lab today to genetically modify food came directly from nature. Viruses started placing themselves in our food long before we ever did. We learned from nature how to manipulate the genetic make up of plants.

All foods are/have been genetically modified whether its with grafting, cross-breeding, or with a gene gun. You rant about things not being "natural." This is an anti-technology belief system based on some sort of mysticism. Humans dying from disease is perfectly natural. Using advanced technology to save people from those diseases is not natural. To believe that natural is going to be better than GMO because natural is just better, and that anything not natural is bad, is the height of absurdity. Your goofy links notwithstanding.

23 posted on 09/28/2013 6:42:57 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mase

That he’s not venerated worldwide is the tragedy. Liberals don’t believe in human life. So somebody who saved lives cannot be lifted up as an example. If he perfected a more effective technology or procedure for abortion, he’d be in every school house and book.

As for FReepers, I think scientific ignorance and a general suspicion of the ‘powers that be’ leads to a lot of this bad thinking. I also think that bad thinking about God and creation leads to this, that somehow messing with nature is ruinous in a Frankensteinian way.

One consistent thing about wrestlers is that they turn out conservative. Take care and be undaunted.


24 posted on 09/28/2013 7:02:47 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mase
Genetic manipulation is on steroids and its no accident that the amount of genetically modified items in all our foods is a major contributor to the epidemic rise of celiac disease and diabetes. Try to find a can of tuna without any soy. 93% of all US soy crops in 2013 are genetically modified, 90% of corn, 92% of cotton. Celiac disease and diabetes is a food allergy to the crap in our foods.

I know. Mr. Peel was diagnosed diabetic - he was NOT over weight - he ate the "healthy" foods - you know, the garbage "chemically the same" foods like splenda instead of raw honey, diet colas, etc and became diabetic, not through his weight but through the additives in the foods.

The Genetically modified foods pose the greatest danger. And the danger is increasing as more and more foods are "re-engineered". To think that man can supplant Mother Nature is hubris in the extreme.

25 posted on 09/28/2013 7:14:17 AM PDT by MrsEmmaPeel (a government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MrsEmmaPeel
he ate the "healthy" foods - you know, the garbage "chemically the same" foods like splenda instead of raw honey,

Who told you Splenda was chemically the same as honey?

26 posted on 09/28/2013 10:48:13 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MrsEmmaPeel

The danger is also to the export market of crops, GMO contaminated crops are being rejected... economically impacting farmers


27 posted on 09/28/2013 2:12:51 PM PDT by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Splenda was originally marketed as "coming from sugar and tastes like sugar". They lost a major court case in 2007. On the topic of Mr. Peel's diabetes, we were told by his doctors and hospital staff to go "sugar-free". That turned out to be a massive misdirection. He can digest raw sugar and raw honey just fine. He cannot digest the synthetic, man-made sugars very well at all.

The other great marketing lie you'll see these days is the use of the word: "natural" as in "100% Natural". When you read the actual label, you'll find that there's everything in the product BUT naturally occurring items.

28 posted on 09/28/2013 3:10:49 PM PDT by MrsEmmaPeel (a government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: opentalk
The shame is that alfalfa needs the humble bee to germinate. So, the GMO alfalfa crop may have been hundreds of miles away, and the contamination with the non-GMO crop spread by the bee. The non-GMO, organic farmers lobbied congress not to allow GMO crops that needed bees to germinate, as they were afraid that once allowed, no organic crop would be safe.

This doesn't bode well for organic farmers everywhere.

29 posted on 09/28/2013 3:16:34 PM PDT by MrsEmmaPeel (a government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MrsEmmaPeel
Splenda was originally marketed as "coming from sugar and tastes like sugar".

Both statements are true.

He can digest raw sugar and raw honey just fine. He cannot digest the synthetic, man-made sugars very well at all.

Splenda is indigestible, that's why it is calorie free.

30 posted on 09/28/2013 3:23:05 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Splenda, even though it is calorie free raises his blood sugar level and keeps it raised. Raw sugar and raw honey, also raise his blood sugar levels, BUT not as long, and his body is able to return to normal blood sugar levels after having a food with raw honey / raw sugar as opposed to the synthetics sugars.


31 posted on 09/28/2013 7:28:52 PM PDT by MrsEmmaPeel (a government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MrsEmmaPeel
You can use most sugar substitutes if you have diabetes, including:
Saccharin (Sweet’N Low)
Aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal)
Acesulfame potassium (Sunett)
Sucralose (Splenda)
Stevia (Pure Via, Truvia)

Artificial sweeteners, or sugar substitutes, offer the sweetness of sugar without the calories. Artificial sweeteners are many times sweeter than sugar, so it takes a smaller amount to sweeten foods. This is why foods made with artificial sweeteners may have fewer calories than those made with sugar.

Sugar substitutes don't affect your blood sugar level. In fact, most artificial sweeteners are considered “free foods” — foods containing less than 20 calories and 5 grams or less of carbohydrates — because they don't count as calories or carbohydrates on a diabetes exchange. Remember, however, other ingredients in foods containing artificial sweeteners can still affect your blood sugar level.

Also, be cautious with sugar alcohols — including mannitol, sorbitol and xylitol. Sugar alcohols can increase your blood sugar level. And for some people, sugar alcohols may cause diarrhea.

M. Regina Castro, M.D.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/artificial-sweeteners/AN00348

32 posted on 09/28/2013 10:04:24 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Science is hard. Harder if you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson