SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Farming -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jon Koplik who wrote (54)7/27/1999 1:34:00 AM
From: Jon K.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 4443
 
Hello farmer jon,

I wanted to be a farmer someday...
Would like to eat eggs that are not from caged hens,
fruits and vegetables that are not contaminated with pesticide,
beef and milk that are not filled with antibiotic and hormones...

I don't feel like eating genetically engineered stuff, do you?

jk



To: Jon Koplik who wrote (54)1/17/2000 1:08:00 AM
From: Jon Koplik  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 4443
 
More stuff on Bt corn and Monarch butterflies.


January 16, 2000

New Restrictions on Biotech Corn

Filed at 4:00 p.m. EST

By The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government is putting new planting restrictions
on genetically engineered corn to prevent insects from developing resistance
to the toxin in the biotech crop.

About 30 percent of the corn grown last year was Bt corn, named for the
bacteria it contains to kill the European corn borer.

The new restrictions, which the Environmental Protection Agency worked
out with the industry, will require farmers to plant at least 20 percent
conventional corn in most regions, and 50 percent in areas where cotton is
grown.

Seed companies will be required to expand field monitoring for signs of
where insect resistance may be occurring.

The companies also are to ``communicate voluntary measures' to protect
Monarch butterflies from the corn. The EPA posted a brief notice about the
new restrictions Friday on its Web site.

The butterfly larvae feed on milkweed, which sometimes is found around
corn fields. A study released in May by Cornell University said Monarch
larvae died when they ate pollen from the Bt corn.

``We are really happy to see that the agency is taking the resistance issues
and the Monarch issue seriously,' said Margaret Mellon, director of the
agricultural and biotechnology program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

``We think the agency has done a good job of jawboning the industry and
getting them to agree to the restrictions in an environment where strictly
speaking they don't have to. We're concerned that they didn't go far enough.'

Rebecca Goldburg, senior scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund, said
the new restrictions ``confirm the fact that Bt corn can pose both an
environmental and resistance management risk.'

The planting restrictions are along the lines of recommendations made by the
National Corn Growers Association, said Leon Corzine, an Illinois farmer
who serves on an association committee that handles biotech issues.

The EPA action is unlikely to have much effect on farmers because they
already are likely to cut back on production of Bt corn due to consumer
resistance to biotech food in U.S. export markets. Also, corn borer
infestations have been low throughout much of the Midwest for the past two
years.

The planting restrictions will be higher in cotton-growing areas because of
the widespread use of a Bt-version of cotton.

The European Commission, which enforces rules for the 15-member
European Union, cited the Cornell study last summer in delaying approval of
pending requests to sell the corn variety. Mexican environmentalists urged
their government to ban its import and use.

In response to the study, EPA scientists said last year that they knew that the
pollen could kill insects but did not believe the butterflies would be exposed to
the toxin outside the laboratory.

The agency is to consider renewing expiring registrations for Bt corn later
this year and has asked seed companies to provide data on its impact.


Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company